↓ Skip to main content

Photo-affinity labeling (PAL) in chemical proteomics: a handy tool to investigate protein-protein interactions (PPIs)

Overview of attention for article published in Proteome Science, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#11 of 209)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
patent
2 patents
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
122 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
410 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
Photo-affinity labeling (PAL) in chemical proteomics: a handy tool to investigate protein-protein interactions (PPIs)
Published in
Proteome Science, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12953-017-0123-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dhiraj P. Murale, Seong Cheol Hong, Md. Mamunul Haque, Jun-Seok Lee

Abstract

Protein-protein interactions (PPIs) trigger a wide range of biological signaling pathways that are crucial for biomedical research and drug discovery. Various techniques have been used to study specific proteins, including affinity chromatography, activity-based probes, affinity-based probes and photo-affinity labeling (PAL). PAL has become one of the most powerful strategies to study PPIs. Traditional photocrosslinkers are used in PAL, including benzophenone, aryl azide, and diazirine. Upon photoirradiation, these photocrosslinkers (Pls) generate highly reactive species that react with adjacent molecules, resulting in a direct covalent modification. This review introduces recent examples of chemical proteomics study using PAL for PPIs.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 410 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 100 24%
Researcher 55 13%
Student > Master 52 13%
Student > Bachelor 38 9%
Student > Postgraduate 15 4%
Other 43 10%
Unknown 107 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 163 40%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 75 18%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 11 3%
Engineering 9 2%
Other 22 5%
Unknown 114 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 27 February 2024.
All research outputs
#3,574,284
of 25,440,205 outputs
Outputs from Proteome Science
#11
of 209 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,043
of 329,207 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proteome Science
#1
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,440,205 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 209 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
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 329,207 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them