↓ Skip to main content

Systematic Comparison of Ultraviolet Photodissociation and Electron Transfer Dissociation for Peptide Anion Characterization

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 Mendeley
Title
Systematic Comparison of Ultraviolet Photodissociation and Electron Transfer Dissociation for Peptide Anion Characterization
Published in
Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, August 2012
DOI 10.1007/s13361-012-0424-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jared B. Shaw, James A. Madsen, Hua Xu, Jennifer S. Brodbelt

Abstract

Ultraviolet photodissociation at 193 nm (UVPD) and negative electron transfer dissociation (NETD) were compared to establish their utility for characterizing acidic proteomes with respect to sequence coverage distributions (a measure of product ion signals across the peptide backbone), sequence coverage percentages, backbone cleavage preferences, and fragmentation differences relative to precursor charge state. UVPD yielded significantly more diagnostic information compared with NETD for lower charge states (n ≤ 2), but both methods were comparable for higher charged species. While UVPD often generated a more heterogeneous array of sequence-specific products (b-, y-, c-, z-, Y-, d-, and w-type ions in addition to a- and x- type ions), NETD usually created simpler sets of a/x-type ions. LC-MS/UVPD and LC-MS/NETD analysis of protein digests utilizing high pH mobile phases coupled with automated database searching via modified versions of the MassMatrix algorithm was undertaken. UVPD generally outperformed NETD in stand-alone searches due to its ability to efficiently sequence both lower and higher charge states with rapid activation times. However, when combined with traditional positive mode CID, both methods yielded complementary information with significantly increased sequence coverage percentages and unique peptide identifications over that of just CID alone.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 4%
Unknown 26 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 26%
Researcher 5 19%
Professor 5 19%
Student > Master 3 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 11%
Other 4 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 16 59%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Unspecified 1 4%
Arts and Humanities 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 2 7%
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 21 August 2012.
All research outputs
#15,517,312
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#2,346
of 3,833 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#105,385
of 174,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#20
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,833 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 174,034 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 62 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 67% of its contemporaries.