↓ Skip to main content

Characterization of the Kluyveromyces marxianus strain DMB1 YGL157w gene product as a broad specificity NADPH-dependent aldehyde reductase

Overview of attention for article published in AMB Express, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
Characterization of the Kluyveromyces marxianus strain DMB1 YGL157w gene product as a broad specificity NADPH-dependent aldehyde reductase
Published in
AMB Express, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13568-015-0104-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hironaga Akita, Masahiro Watanabe, Toshihiro Suzuki, Nobutaka Nakashima, Tamotsu Hoshino

Abstract

The open reading frame YGL157w in the genome of the yeast Kluyveromyces marxianus strain DMB1 encodes a putative uncharacterized oxidoreductase. However, this protein shows 46% identity with the Saccharomyces cerevisiae S288c NADPH-dependent methylglyoxal reductase, which exhibits broad substrate specificity for aldehydes. In the present study, the YGL157w gene product (KmGRE2) was purified to homogeneity from overexpressing Escherichia coli cells and found to be a monomer. The enzyme was strictly specific for NADPH and was active with a wide variety of substrates, including aliphatic (branched-chain and linear) and aromatic aldehydes. The optimal pH for methylglyoxal reduction was 5.5. With methylglyoxal as a substrate, the optimal temperature for enzyme activity at pH 5.5 was 45°C. The enzyme retained more than 70% of its activity after incubation for 30 min at temperatures below 35°C or at pHs between 5.5 and 9.0. In addition, the KmGRE2-overexpressing E. coli showed improved growth when cultivated in cedar hydrolysate, as compared to cells not expressing the enzyme. Taken together, these results indicate that KmGRE2 is potentially useful as an inhibit decomposer in E. coli cells.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 5%
Unknown 19 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 35%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 25%
Student > Master 2 10%
Professor 1 5%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 2 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 30%
Engineering 2 10%
Chemical Engineering 1 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 2 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 04 March 2015.
All research outputs
#2,565,685
of 4,833,230 outputs
Outputs from AMB Express
#103
of 233 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,000
of 144,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AMB Express
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,833,230 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 233 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.7. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 144,105 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.