↓ Skip to main content

Interpretation of the temperature dependence of equilibrium and rate constants

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Molecular Recognition, January 2006
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
110 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Interpretation of the temperature dependence of equilibrium and rate constants
Published in
Journal of Molecular Recognition, January 2006
DOI 10.1002/jmr.799
Pubmed ID
Authors

Donald J. Winzor, Craig M. Jackson

Abstract

The objective of this review is to draw attention to potential pitfalls in attempts to glean mechanistic information from the magnitudes of standard enthalpies and entropies derived from the temperature dependence of equilibrium and rate constants for protein interactions. Problems arise because the minimalist model that suffices to describe the energy differences between initial and final states usually comprises a set of linked equilibria, each of which is characterized by its own energetics. For example, because the overall standard enthalpy is a composite of those individual values, a positive magnitude for DeltaH(o) can still arise despite all reactions within the subset being characterized by negative enthalpy changes: designation of the reaction as being entropy driven is thus equivocal. An experimenter must always bear in mind the fact that any mechanistic interpretation of the magnitudes of thermodynamic parameters refers to the reaction model rather than the experimental system. For the same reason there is little point in subjecting the temperature dependence of rate constants for protein interactions to transition-state analysis. If comparisons with reported values of standard enthalpy and entropy of activation are needed, they are readily calculated from the empirical Arrhenius parameters.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 5%
Germany 2 2%
Brazil 1 <1%
Lithuania 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 101 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 24%
Researcher 27 23%
Student > Master 12 10%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 5%
Other 19 16%
Unknown 16 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 23%
Chemistry 26 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 12%
Engineering 10 9%
Physics and Astronomy 7 6%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 21 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 27 October 2011.
All research outputs
#7,453,479
of 22,786,691 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Molecular Recognition
#185
of 578 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,085
of 154,379 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Molecular Recognition
#6
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,786,691 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 578 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 154,379 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.