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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Vesicular restriction of synaptobrevin suggests a role for calcium in membrane fusion
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature, February 2002
|
| DOI | 10.1038/415646a |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kuang Hu, Joe Carroll, Sergei Fedorovich, Colin Rickman, Andrei Sukhodub, Bazbek Davletov |
| Abstract |
Release of neurotransmitter occurs when synaptic vesicles fuse with the plasma membrane. This neuronal exocytosis is triggered by calcium and requires three SNARE (soluble-N-ethylmaleimide-sensitive factor attachment protein receptors) proteins: synaptobrevin (also known as VAMP) on the synaptic vesicle, and syntaxin and SNAP-25 on the plasma membrane. Neuronal SNARE proteins form a parallel four-helix bundle that is thought to drive the fusion of opposing membranes. As formation of this SNARE complex in solution does not require calcium, it is not clear what function calcium has in triggering SNARE-mediated membrane fusion. We now demonstrate that whereas syntaxin and SNAP-25 in target membranes are freely available for SNARE complex formation, availability of synaptobrevin on synaptic vesicles is very limited. Calcium at micromolar concentrations triggers SNARE complex formation and fusion between synaptic vesicles and reconstituted target membranes. Although calcium does promote interaction of SNARE proteins between opposing membranes, it does not act by releasing synaptobrevin from synaptic vesicle restriction. Rather, our data suggest a mechanism in which calcium-triggered membrane apposition enables syntaxin and SNAP-25 to engage synaptobrevin, leading to membrane fusion. |
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 Kingdom | 3 | 3% |
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Germany | 2 | 2% |
| France | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 101 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 27 | 25% |
| Researcher | 23 | 21% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 12 | 11% |
| Professor | 9 | 8% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 14% |
| Unknown | 16 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 42 | 38% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 14 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 11% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 5% |
| Unknown | 16 | 15% |
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 31 May 2022.
All research outputs
#4,719,237
of 22,880,691 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#55,628
of 91,073 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,388
of 123,768 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#176
of 339 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,691 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 91,073 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 99.5. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 123,768 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 339 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.