↓ Skip to main content

Validating lipid force fields against experimental data: Progress, challenges and perspectives

Overview of attention for article published in Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA), February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
165 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
Validating lipid force fields against experimental data: Progress, challenges and perspectives
Published in
Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA), February 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.bbamem.2016.01.029
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Poger, Bertrand Caron, Alan E. Mark

Abstract

Biological membranes display a great diversity in lipid composition and lateral structure that is crucial in a variety of cellular functions. Simulations of membranes have contributed significantly to the understanding of the properties, functions and behaviour of membranes and membrane-protein assemblies. This success relies on the ability of the force field used to describe lipid-lipid and lipid-environment interactions accurately, reproducibly and realistically. In this review, we present some recent progress in lipid force-field development and validation strategies. In particular, we highlight how a range of properties obtained from various experimental techniques on lipid bilayers and membranes, can be used to assess the quality of a force field. We discuss the limitations and assumptions that are inherent to both computational and experimental approaches and how these can influence the comparison between simulations and experimental data. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Membrane Proteins edited by J.C. Gumbart and Sergei Noskov.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Czechia 2 1%
Uruguay 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 157 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 44 27%
Researcher 33 20%
Student > Master 19 12%
Student > Bachelor 19 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 20 12%
Unknown 20 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 38 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 31 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 15%
Physics and Astronomy 12 7%
Engineering 7 4%
Other 28 17%
Unknown 25 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 14 August 2018.
All research outputs
#4,312,846
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA)
#1,970
of 19,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,084
of 405,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA)
#45
of 394 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 19,216 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 405,859 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 394 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.