↓ Skip to main content

Hierarchical design of artificial proteins and complexes toward synthetic structural biology

Overview of attention for article published in Biophysical Reviews, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
60 Mendeley
Title
Hierarchical design of artificial proteins and complexes toward synthetic structural biology
Published in
Biophysical Reviews, December 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12551-017-0376-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ryoichi Arai

Abstract

In multiscale structural biology, synthetic approaches are important to demonstrate biophysical principles and mechanisms underlying the structure, function, and action of bio-nanomachines. A central goal of "synthetic structural biology" is the design and construction of artificial proteins and protein complexes as desired. In this paper, I review recent remarkable progress of an array of approaches for hierarchical design of artificial proteins and complexes that signpost the path forward toward synthetic structural biology as an emerging interdisciplinary field. Topics covered include combinatorial and protein-engineering approaches for directed evolution of artificial binding proteins and membrane proteins, binary code strategy for structural and functional de novo proteins, protein nanobuilding block strategy for constructing nano-architectures, protein-metal-organic frameworks for 3D protein complex crystals, and rational and computational approaches for design/creation of artificial proteins and complexes, novel protein folds, ideal/optimized protein structures, novel binding proteins for targeted therapeutics, and self-assembling nanomaterials. Protein designers and engineers look toward a bright future in synthetic structural biology for the next generation of biophysics and biotechnology.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 60 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 20%
Student > Master 9 15%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 11 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 25 42%
Chemistry 5 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 8%
Engineering 4 7%
Chemical Engineering 2 3%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 12 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 19 December 2017.
All research outputs
#6,534,944
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Biophysical Reviews
#121
of 804 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,872
of 442,213 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biophysical Reviews
#8
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 804 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
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 442,213 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.