↓ Skip to main content

Transcriptional Activators Differ in Their Responses to Overexpression of TATA-Box-Binding Protein

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular & Cellular Biology, March 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
3 patents

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Transcriptional Activators Differ in Their Responses to Overexpression of TATA-Box-Binding Protein
Published in
Molecular & Cellular Biology, March 2023
DOI 10.1128/mcb.15.3.1554
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

We investigated how overexpression of human TATA-box-binding protein (TBP) affects the action of estrogen receptor (ER) and compared the response with that of other activators. When ER activates a simple promoter, consisting of a response element and either the collagenase or tk TATA box, TBP overexpression potentiates transcription. TBP potentiates only estrogen-induced and not basal transcription and does so independent of spacing between response element and TATA box. TBP overexpression also reduces autoinhibition by overexpressed ER, suggesting that one target of the autoinhibition may be TBP itself. Both AF-1 and AF-2 domains of ER are potentiated by TBP, and each domain binds TBP in vitro. Like ER, chimeric GAL4/VP16 and GAL4/Tat activators are also potentiated by TBP, as is the synergistic activation by ER and GAL4/VP16 on a complex promoter. Unlike ER, GAL4/Sp1 and GAL4/NF-I become less potent when TBP is overexpressed. Furthermore, synergy between ER and Sp1 or between ER and NF-I, whether these are supplied by transfected GAL4 fusions or by the endogenous genes, is inhibited by TBP overexpression. Thus, ER resembles VP16 in response to TBP overexpression and is different from Sp1 and NF-I, which predominate over ER in setting the response on complex promoters.

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

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

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 27 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 19%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 15%
Professor 3 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 7%
Chemistry 2 7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 November 2005.
All research outputs
#12,344,283
of 34,360,889 outputs
Outputs from Molecular & Cellular Biology
#6,616
of 14,056 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,582
of 449,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular & Cellular Biology
#4,887
of 10,454 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,360,889 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,056 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 449,650 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 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10,454 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.