↓ Skip to main content

A novel expression vector for the secretion of abaecin in Bacillus subtilis

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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.
Title
A novel expression vector for the secretion of abaecin in Bacillus subtilis
Published in
Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, October 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.bjm.2017.01.009
Pubmed ID
Authors

Li, Lan Mu, Xiaojuan Wang, Jingfeng Yu, Ruiping Hu, Zhen Li

Abstract

This study aimed to describe a Bacillus subtilis expression system based on genetically modified B. subtilis. Abaecin, an antimicrobial peptide obtained from Apis mellifera, can enhance the effect of pore-forming peptides from other species on the inhibition of bacterial growth. For the exogenous expression, the abaecin gene was fused with a tobacco etch virus protease cleavage site, a promoter Pglv, and a mature beta-glucanase signal peptide. Also, a B. subtilis expression system was constructed. The recombinant abaecin gene was expressed and purified as a recombinant protein in the culture supernatant. The purified abaecin did not inhibit the growth of Escherichia coli strain K88. Cecropin A and hymenoptaecin exhibited potent bactericidal activities at concentrations of 1 and 1.5μM. Combinatorial assays revealed that cecropin A and hymenoptaecin had sublethal concentrations of 0.3 and 0.5μM. This potentiating functional interaction represents a promising therapeutic strategy. It provides an opportunity to address the rising threat of multidrug-resistant pathogens that are recalcitrant to conventional antibiotics.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 21%
Student > Master 5 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 14%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Other 6 21%
Unknown 4 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 17%
Engineering 3 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 7%
Chemistry 2 7%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 5 17%

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 11 May 2018.
All research outputs
#9,892,991
of 12,923,750 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
#258
of 434 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,294
of 263,880 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
#5
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,923,750 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 434 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 263,880 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.