↓ Skip to main content

Synthetic versus Natural Receptors: Supramolecular Control of Chemical Sensing in Fish

Overview of attention for article published in ACS Chemical Biology, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
patent
1 patent

Readers on

mendeley
35 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.
Article details
Title
Synthetic versus Natural Receptors: Supramolecular Control of Chemical Sensing in Fish
Published in
ACS Chemical Biology, May 2014
DOI 10.1021/cb500172u
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The encapsulation of odorants by the synthetic receptor cucurbit[7]uril (CB[7]) reduces the response of olfactory receptors in Mozambique tilapia (Oreochromis mossambicus) in vivo. For example, the olfactory receptor response to the odorant adamantan-1-amine, as measured by electro-olfactography, was suppressed by 92% in the presence of CB[7]. A reduction in olfactory response of 88% was observed for pentane-1,5-diamine (cadaverine), an odorant associated with carrion avoidance in some fish. The results reveal how the association constants and the concentrations of natural and synthetic receptors play a determinant role and show that synthetic receptors can be used to remove bioactive molecules from fish olfaction.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Portugal 1 3%
India 1 3%
Unknown 32 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 17%
Professor 5 14%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 3 9%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 22 63%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 17%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Unknown 5 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 10 November 2016.
All research outputs
#10,155,100
of 34,089,221 outputs
Outputs from ACS Chemical Biology
#1,922
of 3,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#80,432
of 271,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age from ACS Chemical Biology
#33
of 60 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,089,221 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,990 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 271,900 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 60 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.