↓ Skip to main content

2D FT-ICR MS of Calmodulin: A Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approach

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Title
2D FT-ICR MS of Calmodulin: A Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approach
Published in
Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry, July 2016
DOI 10.1007/s13361-016-1431-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Federico Floris, Maria van Agthoven, Lionel Chiron, Andrew J. Soulby, Christopher A. Wootton, Yuko P. Y. Lam, Mark P. Barrow, Marc-André Delsuc, Peter B. O’Connor

Abstract

Two-dimensional Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance mass spectrometry (2D FT-ICR MS) allows data-independent fragmentation of all ions in a sample and correlation of fragment ions to their precursors through the modulation of precursor ion cyclotron radii prior to fragmentation. Previous results show that implementation of 2D FT-ICR MS with infrared multi-photon dissociation (IRMPD) and electron capture dissociation (ECD) has turned this method into a useful analytical tool. In this work, IRMPD tandem mass spectrometry of calmodulin (CaM) has been performed both in one-dimensional and two-dimensional FT-ICR MS using a top-down and bottom-up approach. 2D IRMPD FT-ICR MS is used to achieve extensive inter-residue bond cleavage and assignment for CaM, using its unique features for fragment identification in a less time- and sample-consuming experiment than doing the same thing using sequential MS/MS experiments. Graphical Abstract ᅟ.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 40 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 6 15%
Researcher 5 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 21 53%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 6 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 October 2021.
All research outputs
#4,835,157
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#451
of 3,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,648
of 377,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the American Society for Mass Spectrometry
#5
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,832 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 377,559 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.