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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
BLAP-Tags, TUBEs and DUB-Chips: Combined Novel Technologies will Advance Molecular Epithelial Physiology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2012.00137 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kirk L. Hamilton |
| Abstract |
The field of ubiquitylation and deubiquitylation of proteins in molecular physiology is growing at a rapid rate. Our understanding of molecular physiology of these processes may become limited by the advancement of technologies that scientists can employ. Therefore, it is important to approach physiological questions of ubiquitylation and deubiquitylation of proteins from a multiple methodological direction. Indeed, the role of ubiquitylation and deubiquitylation of proteins in cellular function has been implicated in the pathophysiology of human diseases including cancer, viral diseases, and neurodegenerative disorders. There are many modulators (activators and inhibitors) of ubiquitylation and deubiquitylation. Therefore, the link is being able to rapidly assess potential modulators of ubiquitylation and deubiquitylation and determine which specific modulators play a role(s) within a particular physiological setting. After the specific modulators have been identified, further experimentation is required to assess the downstream use as potential clinical targets for a particular disease. The first step is to identify the specific modulators. This perspective highlights a multi-prong technologies approach that uses three novel technologies (BLAP-tagged proteins, TUBES, and DUB-Chips) that can rapidly identify a number of potential candidates that modulate ubiquitylation and deubiquitylation of cellular proteins. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 83% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 2 | 33% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 17% |
| Other | 1 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 17% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 50% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 33% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 17% |
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 18 June 2012.
All research outputs
#18,313,878
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#8,042
of 13,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,972
of 244,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#187
of 309 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 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 13,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 244,088 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 309 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.