↓ Skip to main content

Allosteric Control of Substrate Specificity of the Escherichia coli ADP-Glucose Pyrophosphorylase

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Chemistry, June 2017
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
32 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
Allosteric Control of Substrate Specificity of the Escherichia coli ADP-Glucose Pyrophosphorylase
Published in
Frontiers in Chemistry, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fchem.2017.00041
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ana C. Ebrecht, Ligin Solamen, Benjamin L. Hill, Alberto A. Iglesias, Kenneth W. Olsen, Miguel A. Ballicora

Abstract

The substrate specificity of enzymes is crucial to control the fate of metabolites to different pathways. However, there is growing evidence that many enzymes can catalyze alternative reactions. This promiscuous behavior has important implications in protein evolution and the acquisition of new functions. The question is how the undesirable outcomes of in vivo promiscuity can be prevented. ADP-glucose pyrophosphorylase from Escherichia coli is an example of an enzyme that needs to select the correct substrate from a broad spectrum of alternatives. This selection will guide the flow of carbohydrate metabolism toward the synthesis of reserve polysaccharides. Here, we show that the allosteric activator fructose-1,6-bisphosphate plays a role in such selection by increasing the catalytic efficiency of the enzyme toward the use of ATP rather than other nucleotides. In the presence of fructose-1,6-bisphosphate, the kcat/S0.5 for ATP was near ~600-fold higher that other nucleotides, whereas in the absence of activator was only ~3-fold higher. We propose that the allosteric regulation of certain enzymes is an evolutionary mechanism of adaptation for the selection of specific substrates.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 34%
Researcher 4 13%
Student > Postgraduate 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Student > Master 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 7 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 50%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 16%
Chemistry 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Unknown 7 22%
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 05 July 2017.
All research outputs
#18,555,330
of 22,981,247 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Chemistry
#2,226
of 5,993 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,720
of 316,587 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Chemistry
#17
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,981,247 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,993 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 51% 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 316,587 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.