↓ Skip to main content

An Optimized Procedure for the Site-Directed Labeling of NGF and proNGF for Imaging Purposes

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
An Optimized Procedure for the Site-Directed Labeling of NGF and proNGF for Imaging Purposes
Published in
Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences, February 2017
DOI 10.3389/fmolb.2017.00004
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pierluigi Di Matteo, Mariantonietta Calvello, Stefano Luin, Laura Marchetti, Antonino Cattaneo

Abstract

Neurotrophins are growth factors of fundamental importance for the development, survival and maintenance of different neuronal and non-neuronal populations. Over the years, the use of labeled neurotrophins has helped in the study of their biological functions, leading to a better understanding of the processes that regulate their transport, traffic, and signaling. However, the diverse and heterogeneous neurotrophin labeling strategies adopted so far have often led to poorly reproducible protocols and sometimes conflicting conclusions. Here we present a robust, reliable, and fast method to obtain homogeneous preparations of fluorescent proNGF and NGF with 1:1 labeling stoichiometry. This strategy is well suited for several applications, ranging from advanced imaging techniques such as single particle tracking, to analyses that require large amounts of neurotrophins such as in vivo monitoring of protein biodistribution. As a proof of the quality of the labeled NGF and proNGF preparations, we provide a quantitative analysis of their colocalization with proteins involved in the signaling endosome function and sorting. This new analysis allowed demonstrating that proNGF localizes at a sub-population of endosomes not completely overlapped to the one hosting NGF.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 19%
Other 3 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 8 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 23%
Neuroscience 3 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Unspecified 1 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 9 35%
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 03 February 2017.
All research outputs
#18,529,032
of 22,950,943 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
#1,970
of 3,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#310,646
of 420,304 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
#15
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,950,943 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,827 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 420,304 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.