↓ Skip to main content

Predictive Model of Lymphocyte-Specific Protein Tyrosine Kinase (LCK) Autoregulation

Overview of attention for article published in Cellular and Molecular Bioengineering, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
Predictive Model of Lymphocyte-Specific Protein Tyrosine Kinase (LCK) Autoregulation
Published in
Cellular and Molecular Bioengineering, April 2016
DOI 10.1007/s12195-016-0438-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer A. Rohrs, Pin Wang, Stacey D. Finley

Abstract

Lymphocyte-specific protein tyrosine kinase (LCK) is a key activator of T cells; however, little is known about the specific autoregulatory mechanisms that control its activity. We have constructed a model of LCK autophosphorylation and phosphorylation by the regulating kinase CSK. The model was fit to existing experimental data in the literature that presents an in vitro reconstituted membrane system, which provides more physiologically relevant kinetic measurements than traditional solution-based systems. The model is able to predict a robust mechanism of LCK autoregulation. It provides insights into the molecular causes of key site-specific phosphorylation differences between distinct experimental conditions. Probing the model also provides new hypotheses regarding the influence of individual binding and catalytic rates, which can be tested experimentally. This minimal model is required to elucidate the mechanistic interactions of LCK and CSK and can be further expanded to better understand T cell activation from a systems perspective. Our computational model enables the evaluation of LCK protein interactions that mediate T cell activation on a more quantitative level, providing new insights and testable hypotheses.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 21%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 15%
Student > Postgraduate 4 12%
Student > Master 4 12%
Unspecified 2 6%
Other 8 24%
Unknown 3 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 24%
Mathematics 5 15%
Engineering 5 15%
Chemical Engineering 3 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Other 6 18%
Unknown 4 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 13 August 2016.
All research outputs
#6,753,465
of 22,865,319 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Bioengineering
#119
of 459 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#94,922
of 298,924 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Bioengineering
#4
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,865,319 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 459 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 298,924 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.