↓ Skip to main content

The Role of Non-Native Interactions in the Folding of Knotted Proteins

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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
The Role of Non-Native Interactions in the Folding of Knotted Proteins
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, June 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002504
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tatjana Škrbić, Cristian Micheletti, Pietro Faccioli

Abstract

Stochastic simulations of coarse-grained protein models are used to investigate the propensity to form knots in early stages of protein folding. The study is carried out comparatively for two homologous carbamoyltransferases, a natively-knotted N-acetylornithine carbamoyltransferase (AOTCase) and an unknotted ornithine carbamoyltransferase (OTCase). In addition, two different sets of pairwise amino acid interactions are considered: one promoting exclusively native interactions, and the other additionally including non-native quasi-chemical and electrostatic interactions. With the former model neither protein shows a propensity to form knots. With the additional non-native interactions, knotting propensity remains negligible for the natively-unknotted OTCase while for AOTCase it is much enhanced. Analysis of the trajectories suggests that the different entanglement of the two transcarbamylases follows from the tendency of the C-terminal to point away from (for OTCase) or approach and eventually thread (for AOTCase) other regions of partly-folded protein. The analysis of the OTCase/AOTCase pair clarifies that natively-knotted proteins can spontaneously knot during early folding stages and that non-native sequence-dependent interactions are important for promoting and disfavouring early knotting events.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Peru 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 41 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 28%
Researcher 9 20%
Professor 5 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 5 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 12 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 22%
Chemistry 6 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 11%
Computer Science 3 7%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 7 15%
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 15 June 2012.
All research outputs
#15,801,823
of 25,461,852 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#6,768
of 8,981 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#108,985
of 181,274 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#76
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,461,852 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,981 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 181,274 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.