↓ Skip to main content

Identification and classification of small molecule kinases: insights into substrate recognition and specificity

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
Identification and classification of small molecule kinases: insights into substrate recognition and specificity
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12862-015-0576-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Krishnadev Oruganty, Eric E. Talevich, Andrew F. Neuwald, Natarajan Kannan

Abstract

Many prokaryotic kinases that phosphorylate small molecule substrates, such as antibiotics, lipids and sugars, are evolutionarily related to Eukaryotic Protein Kinases (EPKs). These Eukaryotic-Like Kinases (ELKs) share the same overall structural fold as EPKs, but differ in their modes of regulation, substrate recognition and specificity-the sequence and structural determinants of which are poorly understood. To better understand the basis for ELK specificity, we applied a Bayesian classification procedure designed to identify sequence determinants responsible for functional divergence. This reveals that a large and diverse family of aminoglycoside kinases, characterized members of which are involved in antibiotic resistance, fall into major sub-groups based on differences in putative substrate recognition motifs. Aminoglycoside kinase substrate specificity follows simple rules of alternating hydroxyl and amino groups that is strongly correlated with variations at the DFG + 1 position. Substrate specificity determining features in small molecule kinases are mostly confined to the catalytic core and can be identified based on quantitative sequence and crystal structure comparisons.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 33%
Student > Bachelor 3 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 44%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Neuroscience 1 6%
Engineering 1 6%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 17%
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 11 September 2016.
All research outputs
#15,168,964
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#2,554
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#202,533
of 400,104 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#46
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 400,104 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.