↓ Skip to main content

Individual MHCI-Restricted T-Cell Receptors are Characterized by a Unique Peptide Recognition Signature

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
Individual MHCI-Restricted T-Cell Receptors are Characterized by a Unique Peptide Recognition Signature
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2013.00199
Pubmed ID
Authors

Linda Wooldridge

Abstract

Effective immunity requires that a limited TCR repertoire is able to recognize a vast number of foreign peptide-MHCI (peptide-major histocompatibility complex class I) molecules. This challenge is overcome by the ability of individual TCRs to recognize large numbers of peptides. Recently, it was demonstrated that MHCI-restricted TCRs can recognize up to 10(6) peptides of a defined length. Astonishingly, this remarkable level of promiscuity does not extend to peptides of different lengths, a fundamental observation that has broad implications for CD8(+) T-cell immunity. In particular, the findings suggest that effective immunity can only be achieved by mobilization of "length-matched" CD8(+) T-cell clonotypes. Overall, recent findings suggest that every TCR is specific for a unique set of peptides, which can be described as a unique "peptide recognition signature" (PRS) and consists of three components: (1) peptide length preference, (2) number of peptides recognized; and, (3) sequence identity (e.g., self versus pathogen derived). In future, the ability to de-convolute peptide recognition signatures across the normal and pathogenic repertoire will be essential for understanding the system requirements for effective CD8(+) T-cell immunity and elucidating mechanisms which underlie CD8(+) T-cell mediated disease.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 3%
India 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Unknown 27 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 37%
Researcher 7 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 2 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 7%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 2 7%
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 25 July 2013.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#22,570
of 31,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,299
of 288,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#240
of 503 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,513 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 288,986 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 503 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.