↓ Skip to main content

Chaperones in Polyglutamine Aggregation: Beyond the Q-Stretch

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
98 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
Chaperones in Polyglutamine Aggregation: Beyond the Q-Stretch
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2017.00145
Pubmed ID
Authors

E F E Kuiper, Eduardo P de Mattos, Laura B Jardim, Harm H Kampinga, Steven Bergink

Abstract

Expanded polyglutamine (polyQ) stretches in at least nine unrelated proteins lead to inherited neuronal dysfunction and degeneration. The expansion size in all diseases correlates with age at onset (AO) of disease and with polyQ protein aggregation, indicating that the expanded polyQ stretch is the main driving force for the disease onset. Interestingly, there is marked interpatient variability in expansion thresholds for a given disease. Between different polyQ diseases the repeat length vs. AO also indicates the existence of modulatory effects on aggregation of the upstream and downstream amino acid sequences flanking the Q expansion. This can be either due to intrinsic modulation of aggregation by the flanking regions, or due to differential interaction with other proteins, such as the components of the cellular protein quality control network. Indeed, several lines of evidence suggest that molecular chaperones have impact on the handling of different polyQ proteins. Here, we review factors differentially influencing polyQ aggregation: the Q-stretch itself, modulatory flanking sequences, interaction partners, cleavage of polyQ-containing proteins, and post-translational modifications, with a special focus on the role of molecular chaperones. By discussing typical examples of how these factors influence aggregation, we provide more insight on the variability of AO between different diseases as well as within the same polyQ disorder, on the molecular level.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 96 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 18 18%
Student > Master 18 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 16%
Student > Bachelor 13 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 10 10%
Unknown 18 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 35 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 18%
Neuroscience 14 14%
Chemistry 3 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 19 19%
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 29 March 2017.
All research outputs
#22,764,772
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#10,138
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,198
of 322,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#183
of 206 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 322,668 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 206 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.