↓ Skip to main content

Simple discovery of bacterial biocatalysts from environmental samples through functional metaproteomics

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
68 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
Simple discovery of bacterial biocatalysts from environmental samples through functional metaproteomics
Published in
Microbiome, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s40168-017-0247-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Premankur Sukul, Sina Schäkermann, Julia E. Bandow, Anna Kusnezowa, Minou Nowrousian, Lars I. Leichert

Abstract

Bacterial biocatalysts play a key role in our transition to a bio-based, post-petroleum economy. However, the discovery of new biocatalysts is currently limited by our ability to analyze genomic information and our capacity of functionally screening for desired activities. Here, we present a simple workflow that combines functional metaproteomics and metagenomics, which facilitates the unmediated and direct discovery of biocatalysts in environmental samples. To identify the entirety of lipolytic biocatalysts in a soil sample contaminated with used cooking oil, we detected all proteins active against a fluorogenic substrate in sample's metaproteome using a 2D-gel zymogram. Enzymes' primary structures were then deduced by tryptic in-gel digest and mass spectrometry of the active protein spots, searching against a metagenome database created from the same contaminated soil sample. We then expressed one of the novel biocatalysts heterologously in Escherichia coli and obtained proof of lipolytic activity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 68 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 2 3%
Japan 1 1%
Unknown 65 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 26%
Researcher 12 18%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Master 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Other 12 18%
Unknown 8 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 25%
Environmental Science 5 7%
Engineering 3 4%
Chemistry 3 4%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 12 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 24 July 2017.
All research outputs
#7,414,304
of 24,093,053 outputs
Outputs from Microbiome
#1,403
of 1,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,911
of 313,993 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Microbiome
#38
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,093,053 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,593 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 39.4. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 313,993 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.