↓ Skip to main content

The dynamic determinants of reaction specificity in the IMPDH/GMPR family of (β/α)8 barrel enzymes

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Reviews in Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, February 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
The dynamic determinants of reaction specificity in the IMPDH/GMPR family of (β/α)8 barrel enzymes
Published in
Critical Reviews in Biochemistry & Molecular Biology, February 2012
DOI 10.3109/10409238.2012.656843
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The inosine monophosphate dehydrogenase (IMPDH)/guanosine monophosphate reductase (GMPR) family of (β/α)(8) enzymes presents an excellent opportunity to investigate how subtle changes in enzyme structure change reaction specificity. IMPDH and GMPR bind the same ligands with similar affinities and share a common set of catalytic residues. Both enzymes catalyze a hydride transfer reaction involving a nicotinamide cofactor hydride, and both reactions proceed via the same covalent intermediate. In the case of IMPDH, this intermediate reacts with water, while in GMPR it reacts with ammonia. In both cases, the two chemical transformations are separated by a conformational change. In IMPDH, the conformational change involves a mobile protein flap while in GMPR, the cofactor moves. Thus reaction specificity is controlled by differences in dynamics, which in turn are controlled by residues outside the active site. These findings have some intriguing implications for the evolution of the IMPDH/GMPR family.

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.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 35%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 27%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 3 12%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 54%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 27%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Chemistry 1 4%
Unknown 3 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 January 2022.
All research outputs
#11,899,738
of 34,359,530 outputs
Outputs from Critical Reviews in Biochemistry & Molecular Biology
#272
of 531 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,805
of 311,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Reviews in Biochemistry & Molecular Biology
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,359,530 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 64th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 531 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 311,028 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 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.