↓ Skip to main content

Quantitative differential proteomics of yeast extracellular matrix: there is more to it than meets the eye

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Microbiology, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
47 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
Quantitative differential proteomics of yeast extracellular matrix: there is more to it than meets the eye
Published in
BMC Microbiology, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12866-015-0550-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fábio Faria-Oliveira, Joana Carvalho, Célia Ferreira, Maria Luisa Hernáez, Concha Gil, Cândida Lucas

Abstract

Saccharomyces cerevisiae multicellular communities are sustained by a scaffolding extracellular matrix, which provides spatial organization, and nutrient and water availability, and ensures group survival. According to this tissue-like biology, the yeast extracellular matrix (yECM) is analogous to the higher Eukaryotes counterpart for its polysaccharide and proteinaceous nature. Few works focused on yeast biofilms, identifying the flocculin Flo11 and several members of the HSP70 in the extracellular space. Molecular composition of the yECM, is therefore mostly unknown. The homologue of yeast Gup1 protein in high Eukaryotes (HHATL) acts as a regulator of Hedgehog signal secretion, therefore interfering in morphogenesis and cell-cell communication through the ECM, which mediates but is also regulated by this signalling pathway. In yeast, the deletion of GUP1 was associated with a vast number of diverse phenotypes including the cellular differentiation that accompanies biofilm formation. S. cerevisiae W303-1A wt strain and gup1∆ mutant were used as previously described to generate biofilm-like mats in YPDa from which the yECM proteome was extracted. The proteome from extracellular medium from batch liquid growing cultures was used as control for yECM-only secreted proteins. Proteins were separated by SDS-PAGE and 2DE. Identification was performed by HPLC, LC-MS/MS and MALDI-TOF/TOF. The protein expression comparison between the two strains was done by DIGE, and analysed by DeCyder Extended Data Analysis that included Principal Component Analysis and Hierarchical Cluster Analysis. The proteome of S. cerevisiae yECM from biofilm-like mats was purified and analysed by Nano LC-MS/MS, 2D Difference Gel Electrophoresis (DIGE), and MALDI-TOF/TOF. Two strains were compared, wild type and the mutant defective in GUP1. As controls for the identification of the yECM-only proteins, the proteome from liquid batch cultures was also identified. Proteins were grouped into distinct functional classes, mostly Metabolism, Protein Fate/Remodelling and Cell Rescue and Defence mechanisms, standing out the presence of heat shock chaperones, metalloproteinases, broad signalling cross-talkers and other putative signalling proteins. The data has been deposited to the ProteomeXchange with identifier PXD001133. yECM, as the mammalian counterpart, emerges as highly proteinaceous. As in higher Eukaryotes ECM, numerous proteins that could allow dynamic remodelling, and signalling events to occur in/and via yECM were identified. Importantly, large sets of enzymes encompassing full antagonistic metabolic pathways, suggest that mats develop into two metabolically distinct populations, suggesting that either extensive moonlighting or actual metabolism occurs extracellularly. The gup1∆ showed abnormally loose ECM texture. Accordingly, the correspondent differences in proteome unveiled acetic and citric acid producing enzymes as putative players in structural integrity maintenance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 46 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 17%
Researcher 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 13%
Student > Bachelor 6 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 9%
Other 9 19%
Unknown 8 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 21%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Chemistry 2 4%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 12 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 25 August 2016.
All research outputs
#14,829,358
of 22,834,308 outputs
Outputs from BMC Microbiology
#1,601
of 3,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#214,790
of 386,751 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Microbiology
#22
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,834,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,191 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 386,751 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.