Genotype Phenotype Coupling
Springer US
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Chapter title |
Facile One-Step Generation of Camelid VHH and Avian scFv Libraries for Phage Display by Golden Gate Cloning.
|
|---|---|
| Chapter number | 4 |
| Book title |
Genotype Phenotype Coupling
|
| Published in |
Methods in molecular biology, January 2023
|
| DOI | 10.1007/978-1-0716-3279-6_4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Book ISBNs |
978-1-07-163278-9, 978-1-07-163279-6
|
| Authors |
Bauer, Christina, Ciesielski, Elke, Pekar, Lukas, Krah, Simon, Toleikis, Lars, Zielonka, Stefan, Sellmann, Carolin |
| Abstract |
Since its development in the 1980s, the Nobel Prize-awarded phage display technology has been one of the most commonly used in vitro selection technologies for the discovery of therapeutic and diagnostic antibodies. Besides the importance of selection strategy, one key component of the successful isolation of highly specific recombinant antibodies is the construction of high-quality phage display libraries. However, previous cloning protocols relied on a tedious multistep process with subsequent cloning steps for the introduction of first heavy and then light chain variable genetic antibody fragments (VH and VL). This resulted in reduced cloning efficiency, higher frequency of missing VH or VL sequences, as well as truncated antibody fragments. With the emergence of Golden Gate Cloning (GGC) for the generation of antibody libraries, the possibility of more facile library cloning has arisen. Here, we describe a streamlined one-step GGC strategy for the generation of camelid heavy chain only variable phage display libraries as well as the simultaneous introduction of heavy chain and light chain variable regions from the chicken into a scFv phage display vector. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ecuador | 1 | 17% |
| France | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 17 July 2023.
All research outputs
#8,155,391
of 25,163,238 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#2,466
of 14,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,773
of 474,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#73
of 721 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,163,238 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,132 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. 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 474,229 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 721 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.