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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Codon insertion and deletion functions as a somatic diversification mechanism in human antibody repertoires
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biology Direct, August 2006
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1745-6150-1-24 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Donald C Reason, Jianhui Zhou |
| Abstract |
It has been suggested that codon insertion and/or deletion may represent a mechanism that, along with hypermutation, contributes to the affinity maturation of antibodies. We used repertoire cloning to examine human antibodies directed against 3 carbohydrate antigens and 1 protein antigen for the presence of such modifications. We find that both the insertion and deletion of codons occur frequently in antigen-specific responses following vaccination. Codon insertions and deletions were observed most often in the complementarity determining regions, and less frequently in the framework regions, of VH, Vkappa, and Vlambda gene segments, and involved motifs known to be preferred targets of somatic hypermutation. Clonal lineage analysis shows that these events occur through out the course of the somatic maturation of individual antibody clones. We also determined that these alterations of paratope structure have varying effects on the relative affinity of the binding site for its cognate antigen. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 4% |
| United States | 1 | 4% |
| Argentina | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 25 | 89% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 29% |
| Researcher | 8 | 29% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 11% |
| Unknown | 4 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 14% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 5 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 10 September 2020.
All research outputs
#8,535,472
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Biology Direct
#269
of 537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,048
of 90,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biology Direct
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 537 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.3. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 90,748 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.