↓ Skip to main content

Nucleic Acid Aptamers

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 4: Nucleic Acid Aptamers
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 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.
Chapter title
Nucleic Acid Aptamers
Chapter number 4
Book title
Nucleic Acid Aptamers
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-3197-2_4
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-3196-5, 978-1-4939-3197-2
Authors

Kimoto, Michiko, Matsunaga, Ken-Ichiro, Hirao, Ichiro, Michiko Kimoto, Ken-ichiro Matsunaga, Ichiro Hirao, Matsunaga, Ken-ichiro

Abstract

Genetic alphabet expansion of DNA using unnatural base pair systems is expected to provide a wide variety of novel tools and methods. Recent rapid progress in this area has enabled the creation of several types of unnatural base pairs that function as a third base pair in polymerase reactions. Presently, a major topic is whether the genetic alphabet expansion system actually increases nucleic acid functionalities. We recently applied our unnatural base pair system to in vitro selection (SELEX), using a DNA library containing four natural bases and an unnatural base, and succeeded in the generation of high-affinity DNA aptamers that specifically bind to target proteins. Only a few hydrophobic unnatural bases greatly augmented the affinity of the aptamers. Here, we describe a new approach (genetic alphabet Expansion SELEX, ExSELEX), using our hydrophobic unnatural base pair system for high affinity DNA aptamer generation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
China 1 4%
Unknown 25 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 31%
Researcher 4 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 15%
Other 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 4 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 31%
Chemistry 7 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Unspecified 1 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 6 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 29 August 2016.
All research outputs
#13,301,612
of 22,952,268 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#3,485
of 13,137 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,552
of 394,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#329
of 1,471 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,952,268 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,137 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 394,233 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,471 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.