↓ Skip to main content

Screening for Toxic Amyloid in Yeast Exemplifies the Role of Alternative Pathway Responsible for Cytotoxicity

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.
Title
Screening for Toxic Amyloid in Yeast Exemplifies the Role of Alternative Pathway Responsible for Cytotoxicity
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2009
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0004539
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julien Couthouis, Karine Rébora, Françoise Immel, Karine Berthelot, Michel Castroviejo, Christophe Cullin

Abstract

The relationship between amyloid and toxic species is a central problem since the discovery of amyloid structures in different diseases. Despite intensive efforts in the field, the deleterious species remains unknown at the molecular level. This may reflect the lack of any structure-toxicity study based on a genetic approach. Here we show that a structure-toxicity study without any biochemical prerequisite can be successfully achieved in yeast. A PCR mutagenesis of the amyloid domain of HET-s leads to the identification of a mutant that might impair cellular viability. Cellular and biochemical analyses demonstrate that this toxic mutant forms GFP-amyloid aggregates that differ from the wild-type aggregates in their shape, size and molecular organization. The chaperone Hsp104 that helps to disassemble protein aggregates is strictly required for the cellular toxicity. Our structure-toxicity study suggests that the smallest aggregates are the most toxic, and opens a new way to analyze the relationship between structure and toxicity of amyloid species.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Israel 1 3%
Unknown 37 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 28%
Student > Master 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 4 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 67%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Chemical Engineering 1 3%
Physics and Astronomy 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 6 15%
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 04 January 2013.
All research outputs
#18,325,190
of 22,691,736 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#153,967
of 193,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,665
of 93,078 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#470
of 512 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,691,736 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,720 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 93,078 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 512 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.