| Title |
Glutamine deamidation: an indicator of antiquity, or preservational quality?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry, December 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1002/rcm.7445 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Elena R Schroeter, Timothy P Cleland |
| Abstract |
Much credence has been given in the paleoproteomic community to glutamine deamidation as a proxy for the age of proteins derived from fossil and subfossil material, and this modification has been invoked as a means for determining the endogeneity of molecules recovered from very old fossil specimens. We re-evaluated the relationship between glutamine deamidation and geologic time by examining previously published data from five recent mass spectrometry studies of archeaological fossils. Deamidation values recovered for fossils were graphed against their reported chronologic age using WebPlotDigitizer. The experimental data that has been produced from fossil material to date show that the extent of glutamine deamidation does not correspond to the absolute age of the specimens being examined, but rather show extreme variation between specimens of similar age and taxonomic affinity. Because deamidation rates and levels can be greatly affected by numerous chemical and environmental factors, we propose that glutamine deamidation is better suited as an indicator of preservational quality and/or environmental conditions than a mark of the endogeneity or authenticity of ancient proteins. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 67% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 57 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 33% |
| Researcher | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 12 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 10 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 14% |
| Arts and Humanities | 5 | 9% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 11% |
| Unknown | 15 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 22 February 2023.
All research outputs
#6,113,765
of 24,558,777 outputs
Outputs from Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry
#842
of 4,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,428
of 372,749 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry
#8
of 62 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,558,777 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,897 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
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 372,749 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 62 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.