Article
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 |
A PLA-iRoCS Pipeline for the Localization of Protein–Protein Interactions In Situ
|
|---|---|
| Book title |
Phenotypic Screening
|
| Published in |
Methods in molecular biology, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/978-1-4939-7847-2_12 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Book ISBNs |
978-1-4939-7846-5, 978-1-4939-7847-2
|
| Authors |
Taras Pasternak, William Teale, Thorsten Falk, Benedetto Ruperti, Klaus Palme |
| Abstract |
In plants as well as other organisms, protein localization alone is insufficient to provide a mechanistic link between stimulus and process regulation. This is because protein-protein interactions are central to the regulation of biological processes. However, they remain very difficult to detect in situ, with the choice of tools for the detection of protein-protein interaction in situ still in need of expansion. Here, we provide a protocol for the detection and accurate localization of protein interactions based on the combination of a whole-mount proximity ligation assay and iRoCS, a coordinate system able to standardize subtle differences between the architecture of individual Arabidopsis roots. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 17% |
| Mexico | 1 | 17% |
| Germany | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 3 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 2 | 50% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 50% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 25% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 25% |
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 09 April 2022.
All research outputs
#7,672,248
of 23,507,888 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#2,395
of 13,360 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,545
of 444,882 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#229
of 1,485 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,507,888 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,360 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. 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 444,882 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 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,485 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.