↓ Skip to main content

Signaling efficiency of Gαq through its effectors p63RhoGEF and GEFT depends on their subcellular location

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
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
Signaling efficiency of Gαq through its effectors p63RhoGEF and GEFT depends on their subcellular location
Published in
Scientific Reports, July 2013
DOI 10.1038/srep02284
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joachim Goedhart, Jakobus van Unen, Merel J. W. Adjobo-Hermans, Theodorus W. J. Gadella

Abstract

The p63RhoGEF and GEFT proteins are encoded by the same gene and both members of the Dbl family of guanine nucleotide exchange factors. These proteins can be activated by the heterotrimeric G-protein subunit Gαq. We show that p63RhoGEF is located at the plasma membrane, whereas GEFT is confined to the cytoplasm. Live-cell imaging studies yielded quantitative information on diffusion coefficients, association rates and encounter times of GEFT and p63RhoGEF. Calcium signaling was examined as a measure of the signal transmission, revealing more efficient signaling through the membrane-associated p63RhoGEF. A rapamycin dependent recruitment system was used to dynamically alter the subcellular location and concentration of GEFT, showing efficient signaling through GEFT only upon membrane recruitment. Together, our results show efficient signal transmission through membrane located effectors, and highlight a role for increased concentration rather than increased encounter times due to membrane localization in the Gαq mediated pathways to p63RhoGEF and PLCβ.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 3%
Unknown 36 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 22%
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 8%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 10 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 30%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Chemistry 2 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 24%
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 02 December 2021.
All research outputs
#14,755,656
of 22,714,025 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#71,671
of 122,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,799
of 198,058 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#331
of 558 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,714,025 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 122,421 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 198,058 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 558 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.