↓ Skip to main content

Functional roles of tyrosine 185 during the bacteriorhodopsin photocycle as revealed by in situ spectroscopic studies

Overview of attention for article published in BBA - Bioenergetics, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
8 Mendeley
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
Functional roles of tyrosine 185 during the bacteriorhodopsin photocycle as revealed by in situ spectroscopic studies
Published in
BBA - Bioenergetics, May 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.bbabio.2018.05.011
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaoyan Ding, Chao Sun, Haolin Cui, Sijin Chen, Yujiao Gao, Yanan Yang, Juan Wang, Xiao He, Dinu Iuga, Fang Tian, Anthony Watts, Xin Zhao

Abstract

Tyrosine 185 (Y185), one of the aromatic residues within the retinal (Ret) chromophore binding pocket in helix F of bacteriorhodopsin (bR), is highly conserved among the microbial rhodopsin family proteins. Many studies have investigated the functions of Y185, but its underlying mechanism during the bR photocycle remains unclear. To address this research gap, in situ two-dimensional (2D) magic-angle spinning (MAS) solid-state NMR (ssNMR) of specifically labelled bR, combined with light-induced transient absorption change measurements, dynamic light scattering (DLS) measurements, titration analysis and site-directed mutagenesis, was used to elucidate the functional roles of Y185 during the bR photocycle in the native membrane environment. Different interaction modes were identified between Y185 and the Ret chromophore in the dark-adapted (inactive) state and M (active) state, indicating that Y185 may serve as a rotamer switch maintaining the protein dynamics, and plays an important role in the efficient proton-pumping mechanism in the bR purple membrane.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 25%
Researcher 2 25%
Student > Bachelor 1 13%
Student > Master 1 13%
Other 1 13%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 75%
Chemistry 1 13%
Unknown 1 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 01 June 2018.
All research outputs
#19,975,266
of 25,411,814 outputs
Outputs from BBA - Bioenergetics
#395
of 555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,607
of 343,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BBA - Bioenergetics
#16
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,411,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 555 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 343,991 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.