↓ Skip to main content

Screening and Optimizing Antimicrobial Peptides by Using SPOT-Synthesis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Chemistry, April 2017
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 (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 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
Screening and Optimizing Antimicrobial Peptides by Using SPOT-Synthesis
Published in
Frontiers in Chemistry, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fchem.2017.00025
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paula M. López-Pérez, Elizabeth Grimsey, Luc Bourne, Ralf Mikut, Kai Hilpert

Abstract

Peptide arrays on cellulose are a powerful tool to investigate peptide interactions with a number of different molecules, for examples antibodies, receptors or enzymes. Such peptide arrays can also be used to study interactions with whole cells. In this review, we focus on the interaction of small antimicrobial peptides with bacteria. Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) can kill multidrug-resistant (MDR) human pathogenic bacteria and therefore could be next generation antibiotics targeting MDR bacteria. We describe the screen and the result of different optimization strategies of peptides cleaved from the membrane. In addition, screening of antibacterial activity of peptides that are tethered to the surface is discussed. Surface-active peptides can be used to protect surfaces from bacterial infections, for example implants.

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 profiles of 2 X users 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 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 105 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 26%
Student > Master 18 17%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 9%
Researcher 9 9%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 18 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 25 24%
Chemistry 23 22%
Immunology and Microbiology 9 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 9%
Engineering 6 6%
Other 14 13%
Unknown 19 18%
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 30 October 2018.
All research outputs
#16,376,960
of 26,290,088 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Chemistry
#1,155
of 6,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,262
of 328,744 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Chemistry
#10
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,290,088 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,864 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 328,744 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 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 54% of its contemporaries.