↓ Skip to main content

Food Allergens

Overview of attention for book
Cover of 'Food Allergens'

Table of Contents

  1. Altmetric Badge
    Book Overview
  2. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 1 Overview of the Commonly Used Methods for Food Allergens
  3. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 2 Allergen Extraction and Purification from Natural Products: Main Chromatographic Techniques
  4. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 3 Recombinant Allergen Production in E. coli
  5. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 4 Recombinant Allergens Production in Yeast
  6. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 5 2D-Electrophoresis and Immunoblotting in Food Allergy
  7. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 6 Two-Dimensional Electrophoresis and Identification by Mass Spectrometry
  8. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 7 Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA)
  9. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 8 Detection of Food Allergens by Taqman Real-Time PCR Methodology
  10. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 9 Detection of Food Allergens by Phage-Displayed Produced Antibodies
  11. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 10 Protein Microarray-Based IgE Immunoassay for Allergy Diagnosis
  12. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 11 Basophil Degranulation Assay
  13. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 12 Use of Humanized RS-ATL8 Reporter System for Detection of Allergen-Specific IgE Sensitization in Human Food Allergy
  14. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 13 Assessment of IgE Reactivity of β-Casein by Western Blotting After Digestion with Simulated Gastric Fluid
  15. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 14 IgE Epitope Mapping Using Peptide Microarray Immunoassay
  16. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 15 T-Cell Proliferation Assay: Determination of Immunodominant T-Cell Epitopes of Food Allergens
  17. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 16 Tetramer-Guided Epitope Mapping: A Rapid Approach to Identify HLA-Restricted T-Cell Epitopes from Composite Allergens
  18. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 17 T-Cell Epitope Prediction
  19. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 18 An Overview of Bioinformatics Tools and Resources in Allergy
  20. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 19 The Use of a Semi-Automated System to Measure Mouse Natural Killer T (NKT) Cell Activation by Lipid-Loaded Dendritic Cells
  21. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 20 Recent Advances in the Detection of Allergens in Foods
Attention for Chapter 19: The Use of a Semi-Automated System to Measure Mouse Natural Killer T (NKT) Cell Activation by Lipid-Loaded Dendritic Cells
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
3 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.
Chapter title
The Use of a Semi-Automated System to Measure Mouse Natural Killer T (NKT) Cell Activation by Lipid-Loaded Dendritic Cells
Chapter number 19
Book title
Food Allergens
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-6925-8_19
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-6923-4, 978-1-4939-6925-8
Authors

Ashfaq Ghumra, Marcos Alcocer, Ghumra, Ashfaq, Alcocer, Marcos

Editors

Jing Lin, Marcos Alcocer

Abstract

Cell-based assays are widely used in all aspects of research ranging from understanding basic biological function to identifying compounds for disease intervention. Immortalized cell lines have been ideal components of these assays due to the low cost of growth, easy maintenance, and the ability to obtain homogenous cell populations. Like other molecular assays, cell-based systems have been automated to reduce experimental error. Complex lipids are now recognized as important components of the allergic response, the study of the interaction between NKTs and lipid-activated DCs opens a new perspective into the intrinsic allergenicity of proteins. Here, we describe a semi-automated method to measure IL-2 release upon activation of mouse NKT cells (DN32.D3) by various lipids in a 384-well plate using the Biomek(®) 3000 laboratory automated workstation (Beckman Coulter).

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 3 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 33%
Student > Postgraduate 1 33%
Unknown 1 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 33%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 33%
Unknown 1 33%
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 13 April 2017.
All research outputs
#15,451,618
of 22,961,203 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#5,372
of 13,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,751
of 334,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#115
of 309 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,961,203 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,136 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 334,647 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 309 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.