↓ Skip to main content

A threading receptor for polysaccharides

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Chemistry, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
23 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
Title
A threading receptor for polysaccharides
Published in
Nature Chemistry, November 2015
DOI 10.1038/nchem.2395
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tiddo J. Mooibroek, Juan M. Casas-Solvas, Robert L. Harniman, Charles M. Renney, Tom S. Carter, Matthew P. Crump, Anthony P. Davis

Abstract

Cellulose, chitin and related polysaccharides are key renewable sources of organic molecules and materials. However, poor solubility tends to hamper their exploitation. Synthetic receptors could aid dissolution provided they are capable of cooperative action, for example by multiple threading on a single polysaccharide molecule. Here we report a synthetic receptor designed to form threaded complexes (polypseudorotaxanes) with these natural polymers. The receptor binds fragments of the polysaccharides in aqueous solution with high affinities (Ka up to 19,000 M(-1)), and is shown-by nuclear Overhauser effect spectroscopy-to adopt the threading geometry. Evidence from induced circular dichroism and atomic force microscopy implies that the receptor also forms polypseudorotaxanes with cellulose and its polycationic analogue chitosan. The results hold promise for polysaccharide solubilization under mild conditions, as well as for new approaches to the design of biologically active molecules.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
Unknown 54 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 29%
Student > Master 10 18%
Researcher 8 14%
Unspecified 6 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 11%
Other 10 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 41 73%
Unspecified 7 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Other 3 5%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 15 March 2016.
All research outputs
#1,140,796
of 13,520,515 outputs
Outputs from Nature Chemistry
#1,120
of 2,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,294
of 356,966 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Chemistry
#29
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,520,515 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,204 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 29.7. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 356,966 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 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.