↓ Skip to main content

Studying Spatial Protein Quality Control, Proteopathies, and Aging Using Different Model Misfolding Proteins in S. cerevisiae

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience, July 2018
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
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 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
Studying Spatial Protein Quality Control, Proteopathies, and Aging Using Different Model Misfolding Proteins in S. cerevisiae
Published in
Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnmol.2018.00249
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kara L. Schneider, Thomas Nyström, Per O. Widlund

Abstract

Protein quality control (PQC) is critical to maintain a functioning proteome. Misfolded or toxic proteins are either refolded or degraded by a system of temporal quality control and can also be sequestered into aggregates or inclusions by a system of spatial quality control. Breakdown of this concerted PQC network with age leads to an increased risk for the onset of disease, particularly neurological disease. Saccharomyces cerevisiae has been used extensively to elucidate PQC pathways and general evolutionary conservation of the PQC machinery has led to the development of several useful S. cerevisiae models of human neurological diseases. Key to both of these types of studies has been the development of several different model misfolding proteins, which are used to challenge and monitor the PQC machinery. In this review, we summarize and compare the model misfolding proteins that have been used to specifically study spatial PQC in S. cerevisiae, as well as the misfolding proteins that have been shown to be subject to spatial quality control in S. cerevisiae models of human neurological diseases.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 89 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 22%
Researcher 10 11%
Student > Master 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 20 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 40 45%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 11%
Physics and Astronomy 3 3%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 20 22%
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 July 2018.
All research outputs
#15,014,589
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience
#1,686
of 2,930 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,234
of 329,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience
#67
of 125 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 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 2,930 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 329,731 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 125 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.