↓ Skip to main content

Following Ariadne's thread: a new perspective on RBR ubiquitin ligases

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Biology, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
110 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
Following Ariadne's thread: a new perspective on RBR ubiquitin ligases
Published in
BMC Biology, March 2012
DOI 10.1186/1741-7007-10-24
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dawn M Wenzel, Rachel E Klevit

Abstract

Ubiquitin signaling pathways rely on E3 ligases for effecting the final transfer of ubiquitin from E2 ubiquitin conjugating enzymes to a protein target. Here we re-evaluate the hybrid RING/HECT mechanism used by the E3 family RING-between-RINGs (RBRs) to transfer ubiquitin to substrates. We place RBRs into the context of current knowledge of HECT and RING E3s. Although not as abundant as the other types of E3s (there are only slightly more than a dozen RBR E3s in the human genome), RBRs are conserved in all eukaryotes and play important roles in biology. Re-evaluation of RBR ligases as RING/HECT E3s provokes new questions and challenges the field.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Japan 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 105 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 35 32%
Researcher 14 13%
Student > Master 14 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 16 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 45 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 35 32%
Chemistry 4 4%
Arts and Humanities 2 2%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 6 5%
Unknown 16 15%