↓ Skip to main content

Proteome analysis of shell matrix proteins in the brachiopod Laqueus rubellus

Overview of attention for article published in Proteome Science, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 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
Proteome analysis of shell matrix proteins in the brachiopod Laqueus rubellus
Published in
Proteome Science, August 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12953-015-0077-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yukinobu Isowa, Isao Sarashina, Kenshiro Oshima, Keiji Kito, Masahira Hattori, Kazuyoshi Endo

Abstract

The calcitic brachipod shells contain proteins that play pivotal roles in shell formation and are important in understanding the evolution of biomineralization. Here, we performed a large-scale exploration of shell matrix proteins in the brachiopod Laqueus rubellus. A total of 40 proteins from the shell were identified. Apart from five proteins, i.e., ICP-1, MSP130, a cysteine protease, a superoxide dismutase, and actin, all other proteins identified had no homologues in public databases. Among these unknown proteins, one shell matrix protein was identified with a domain architecture that includes a NAD(P) binding domain, an ABC-type transport system, a transmembrane region, and an aspartic acid rich region, which has not been detected in other biominerals. We also identified pectin lyase-like, trypsin inhibitor, and saposin B functional domains in the amino acid sequences of the shell matrix proteins. The repertoire of brachiopod shell matrix proteins also contains two basic amino acid-rich proteins and proteins that have a variety of repeat sequences. Our study suggests an independent origin and unique mechanisms for brachiopod shell formation.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Other 2 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 9%
Researcher 2 9%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 8 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 14%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 14%
Environmental Science 2 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 9%
Computer Science 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 9 41%
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 19 August 2015.
All research outputs
#15,344,095
of 22,824,164 outputs
Outputs from Proteome Science
#102
of 191 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,577
of 263,348 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proteome Science
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,824,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 191 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.7. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 263,348 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.