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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Effects of cereal soluble dietary fibres on hydrolysis of p -nitrophenyl laurate by pancreatin
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Food & Function, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1039/c6fo00383d |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Honglei Zhai, Purnima Gunness, Michael J. Gidley |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of cereal soluble dietary fibres (SDFs), β-glucans (BG) from oat and barley as well as arabinoxylans (AX) from wheat and rye, on the lipolysis of p-nitrophenyl laurate (p-NP laurate). p-NP laurate emulsions were prepared in the presence of increasing concentrations of SDFs (0.1%, 1.0% and 1.5% w/v), and lipolysis of emulsions by pancreatic lipase, particle size distribution of the p-NP laurate droplets, and viscosity of emulsions with soluble dietary fibres were measured. It was found that with increasing viscosity of SDFs, the rate of lipolysis decreased while the initial droplet size of the emulsion increased. Rate coefficients were more consistently correlated with average droplet size than with viscosity, suggesting that SDFs inhibited lipolysis primarily by increasing the size of droplets through flocculation, thereby decreasing the available surface area for lipase action. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 7% |
| Researcher | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 43% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 7% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 7% |
| Engineering | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 29% |
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 12 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Food & Function
#2,873
of 4,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#295,035
of 399,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Food & Function
#266
of 496 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,871 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 399,662 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 496 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.