↓ Skip to main content

cIAP1/2 Are Direct E3 Ligases Conjugating Diverse Types of Ubiquitin Chains to Receptor Interacting Proteins Kinases 1 to 4 (RIP1–4)

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
118 Mendeley
citeulike
3 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
cIAP1/2 Are Direct E3 Ligases Conjugating Diverse Types of Ubiquitin Chains to Receptor Interacting Proteins Kinases 1 to 4 (RIP1–4)
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0022356
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mathieu J. M. Bertrand, Saskia Lippens, An Staes, Barbara Gilbert, Ria Roelandt, Jelle De Medts, Kris Gevaert, Wim Declercq, Peter Vandenabeele

Abstract

The RIP kinases have emerged as essential mediators of cellular stress that integrate both extracellular stimuli emanating from various cell-surface receptors and signals coming from intracellular pattern recognition receptors. The molecular mechanisms regulating the ability of the RIP proteins to transduce the stress signals remain poorly understood, but seem to rely only partially on their kinase activities. Recent studies on RIP1 and RIP2 have highlighted the importance of ubiquitination as a key process regulating their capacity to activate downstream signaling pathways. In this study, we found that XIAP, cIAP1 and cIAP2 not only directly bind to RIP1 and RIP2 but also to RIP3 and RIP4. We show that cIAP1 and cIAP2 are direct E3 ubiquitin ligases for all four RIP proteins and that cIAP1 is capable of conjugating the RIPs with diverse types of ubiquitin chains, including linear chains. Consistently, we show that repressing cIAP1/2 levels affects the activation of NF-κB that is dependent on RIP1, -2, -3 and -4. Finally, we identified Lys51 and Lys145 of RIP4 as two critical residues for cIAP1-mediated ubiquitination and NF-κB activation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
United States 2 2%
Canada 2 2%
Sweden 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 109 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 23%
Student > Bachelor 13 11%
Student > Master 11 9%
Other 8 7%
Other 17 14%
Unknown 14 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 45 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 32 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 6%
Chemistry 4 3%
Other 8 7%
Unknown 12 10%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 12 September 2011.
All research outputs
#14,717,650
of 22,651,245 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#122,731
of 193,366 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#86,222
of 126,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,552
of 2,503 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,651,245 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,366 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 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 126,005 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,503 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.