↓ Skip to main content

Cross-Linking of Cell Surface Receptors Enhances Cooperativity of Molecular Adhesion

Overview of attention for article published in Biophysical Journal, June 2000
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

patent
3 patents

Readers on

mendeley
106 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
Cross-Linking of Cell Surface Receptors Enhances Cooperativity of Molecular Adhesion
Published in
Biophysical Journal, June 2000
DOI 10.1016/s0006-3495(00)76824-x
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Cooperativity of molecular adhesion has been proposed as a mechanism for enhanced binding strength of adhesion molecules on the cell surface. Direct evidence for its mechanism, however, has been lacking until now. Atomic force microscopy (AFM) was used to measure the adhesive strength between concanavalin A (Con A) coupled to an AFM tip and Con A receptors on the surface of NIH3T3 fibroblast cells. Cross-linking of receptors with either glutaraldehyde or 3, 3'-dithio-bis(sulfosuccinimidylproprionate) (DTSSP) led to an increase in adhesion that could be attributed to enhanced cooperativity among adhesion complexes. An increase in loading rate due to greater stiffness of fixed cells also contributed to the twofold increase in binding strength. These results show that receptor cross-linking can greatly contribute to a total increase in cell adhesion by creating a shift toward cooperative binding of receptors.

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 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 2 2%
South Africa 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Colombia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 99 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 27%
Student > Master 16 15%
Researcher 15 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 11 10%
Professor 6 6%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 17 16%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 25%
Engineering 15 14%
Physics and Astronomy 13 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 8%
Chemistry 7 7%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 22 21%
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 18 February 2025.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Biophysical Journal
#3,254
of 10,295 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,330
of 39,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biophysical Journal
#9
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,295 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 39,990 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.