↓ Skip to main content

Relations between Effects and Structure of Small Bicyclic Molecules on the Complex Model System Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology, March 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
11 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
Relations between Effects and Structure of Small Bicyclic Molecules on the Complex Model System Saccharomyces cerevisiae
Published in
Frontiers in Pharmacology, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphar.2017.00170
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matteo Brilli, Andrea Trabocchi, Tobias Weil, Duccio Cavalieri, Irene Stefanini

Abstract

The development of compounds able to modify biological functions largely took advantage of parallel synthesis to generate a broad chemical variance of compounds to be tested for the desired effect(s). The budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae is a model for pharmacological studies since a long time as it represents a relatively simple system to explore the relations among chemical variance and bioactivity. To identify relations between the chemical features of the molecules and their activity, we delved into the effects of a library of small compounds on the viability of a set of S. cerevisiae strains. Thanks to the high degree of chemical diversity of the tested compounds and to the measured effect on the yeast growth rate, we were able to scale-down the chemical library and to gain information on the most effective structures at the substituent level. Our results represent a valuable source for the selection, rational design, and optimization of bioactive compounds.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 9%
Unknown 10 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 27%
Student > Master 2 18%
Professor 1 9%
Student > Bachelor 1 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 9%
Unknown 5 45%
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 21 April 2017.
All research outputs
#18,540,642
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#8,311
of 16,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,934
of 308,953 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#109
of 201 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 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 16,230 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 308,953 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 201 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.