↓ Skip to main content

Spontaneous Pulsation of Peptide Microstructures in an Abiotic Liquid System.

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Chromatographic Science, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
4 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
Spontaneous Pulsation of Peptide Microstructures in an Abiotic Liquid System.
Published in
Journal of Chromatographic Science, May 2016
DOI 10.1093/chromsci/bmw073
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

We report observations of pulsating peptide formation and depeptidization in 70% aqueous acetonitrile solutions of l-Pro-l-Phe and l-Cys, resulting in the oscillatory appearance and disappearance of solid masses of microfibers and microspheres, respectively. We monitor the concentration changes of the monomeric amino acids by high-performance liquid chromatography. The concentration of all amino acid solutions used is 1.0 mg mL(-1), due to solubility limitations in 70% aqueous acetonitrile. The nonlinear concentration changes of l-Pro, l-Phe and l-Cys, and the amounts of the main peptidization products observed within our monitoring periods (for l-Pro-l-Phe, 250 h, and for l-Cys, 70 h) are typically from several to 20% of the original monomer concentrations. We follow the formation and decay of the insoluble peptides by turbidimetry. We also investigate the materials formed using scanning electron microscopy and mass spectrometry. We carry out numerical simulations on a simple model that reflects the main features of spontaneous pulsation of peptide fiber or sphere formation in this abiotic liquid system.

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

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 4 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 1 25%
Student > Master 1 25%
Unknown 2 50%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 1 25%
Engineering 1 25%
Unknown 2 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 19 May 2016.
All research outputs
#28,604,603
of 34,364,397 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Chromatographic Science
#1,432
of 1,783 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#262,666
of 336,657 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Chromatographic Science
#17
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,364,397 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,783 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 336,657 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.