↓ Skip to main content

APols-Aided Protein Precipitation: A Rapid Method for Concentrating Proteins for Proteomic Analysis

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Membrane Biology, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
APols-Aided Protein Precipitation: A Rapid Method for Concentrating Proteins for Proteomic Analysis
Published in
The Journal of Membrane Biology, May 2014
DOI 10.1007/s00232-014-9668-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhibin Ning, Brett Hawley, Deeptee Seebun, Daniel Figeys

Abstract

Amphipols (APols) are a newly designed and milder class of detergent. They have been used primarily in protein structure analysis for membrane protein trapping and stabilization. We have recently demonstrated that APols can be used as an alternative detergent for proteome extraction and digestion, to achieve a "One-stop" single-tube workflow for proteomics. In this workflow, APols are removed by precipitation after protein digestion without depleting the digested peptides. Here, we took further advantage of this precipitation characteristic of APols to concentrate proteins from diluted samples. In contrast with tryptic peptides, a decrease in pH leads to the unbiased co-precipitation of APols with proteins, including globular hydrophilic proteins. We demonstrated that this precipitation is a combined effect of acid precipitation and the APols' protein interactions. Also, we have been able to demonstrate that APols-aided protein precipitation works well on diluted samples, such as secretome sample, and provides a rapid method for protein concentration.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 35 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 27%
Student > Bachelor 9 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Student > Postgraduate 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 1 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 27%
Computer Science 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 2 5%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 June 2015.
All research outputs
#16,720,137
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Membrane Biology
#616
of 820 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#138,979
of 241,369 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Membrane Biology
#6
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 820 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 241,369 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.