↓ Skip to main content

Controlling topological entanglement in engineered protein hydrogels with a variety of thiol coupling chemistries

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Chemistry, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Controlling topological entanglement in engineered protein hydrogels with a variety of thiol coupling chemistries
Published in
Frontiers in Chemistry, May 2014
DOI 10.3389/fchem.2014.00023
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shengchang Tang, Bradley D. Olsen

Abstract

Topological entanglements between polymer chains are achieved in associating protein hydrogels through the synthesis of high molecular weight proteins via chain extension using a variety of thiol coupling chemistries, including disulfide formation, thiol-maleimide, thiol-bromomaleimide and thiol-ene. Coupling of cysteines via disulfide formation results in the most pronounced entanglement effect in hydrogels, while other chemistries provide versatile means of changing the extent of entanglement, achieving faster chain extension, and providing a facile method of controlling the network hierarchy and incorporating stimuli responsivities. The addition of trifunctional coupling agents causes incomplete crosslinking and introduces branching architecture to the protein molecules. The high-frequency plateau modulus and the entanglement plateau modulus can be tuned by changing the ratio of difunctional chain extender to the trifunctional branching unit. Therefore, these chain extension reactions show promise in delicately controlling the relaxation and mechanical properties of engineered protein hydrogels in ways that complement their design through genetic engineering.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
Unknown 41 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 33%
Student > Master 5 12%
Researcher 5 12%
Professor 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 7 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 13 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 16%
Chemical Engineering 4 9%
Materials Science 4 9%
Engineering 3 7%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 9 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 24 May 2014.
All research outputs
#17,720,553
of 22,755,127 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Chemistry
#1,710
of 5,897 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,286
of 227,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Chemistry
#13
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,755,127 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,897 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 227,204 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.