↓ Skip to main content

Radical Rearrangement Chemistry in Ultraviolet Photodissociation of Iodotyrosine Systems: Insights from Metastable Dissociation, Infrared Ion Spectroscopy, and Reaction Pathway Calculations

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, May 2018
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
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
Title
Radical Rearrangement Chemistry in Ultraviolet Photodissociation of Iodotyrosine Systems: Insights from Metastable Dissociation, Infrared Ion Spectroscopy, and Reaction Pathway Calculations
Published in
Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s13361-018-1959-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karnamohit Ranka, Ning Zhao, Long Yu, John F. Stanton, Nicolas C. Polfer

Abstract

We report on the ultraviolet photodissociation (UVPD) chemistry of protonated tyrosine, iodotyrosine, and diiodotyrosine. Distonic loss of the iodine creates a high-energy radical at the aromatic ring that engages in hydrogen/proton rearrangement chemistry. Based on UVPD kinetics measurements, the appearance of this radical is coincident with the UV irradiation pulse (8 ns). Conversely, sequential UVPD product ions exhibit metastable decay on ca. 100 ns timescales. Infrared ion spectroscopy is capable of confirming putative structures of the rearrangement products as proton transfers from the imine and β-carbon hydrogens. Potential energy surfaces for the various reaction pathways indicate that the rearrangement chemistry is highly complex, compatible with a cascade of rearrangements, and that there is no preferred rearrangement pathway even in small molecular systems like these. Graphical Abstract.

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 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 2 15%
Other 1 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Unspecified 1 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 8%
Other 3 23%
Unknown 4 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 5 38%
Unspecified 1 8%
Physics and Astronomy 1 8%
Engineering 1 8%
Unknown 5 38%
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 24 August 2018.
All research outputs
#16,588,625
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#2,572
of 3,835 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,352
of 344,685 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#40
of 83 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,835 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 344,685 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 83 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.