| Title |
Nanoscale bacteriophage biosensors beyond phage display
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, October 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s51894 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jong-Wook Lee, Jangwon Song, Mintai P Hwang, Kwan Hyi Lee |
| Abstract |
Bacteriophages are traditionally used for the development of phage display technology. Recently, their nanosized dimensions and ease with which genetic modifications can be made to their structure and function have put them in the spotlight towards their use in a variety of biosensors. In particular, the expression of any protein or peptide on the extraluminal surface of bacteriophages is possible by genetically engineering the genome. In addition, the relatively short replication time of bacteriophages offers researchers the ability to generate mass quantities of any given bacteriophage-based biosensor. Coupled with the emergence of various biomarkers in the clinic as a means to determine pathophysiological states, the development of current and novel technologies for their detection and quantification is imperative. In this review, we categorize bacteriophages by their morphology into M13-based filamentous bacteriophages and T4- or T7-based icosahedral bacteriophages, and examine how such advantages are utilized across a variety of biosensors. In essence, we take a comprehensive approach towards recent trends in bacteriophage-based biosensor applications and discuss their outlook with regards to the field of biotechnology. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Colombia | 1 | <1% |
| Nepal | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 143 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 31 | 21% |
| Researcher | 23 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 22 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 12% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 19 | 13% |
| Unknown | 26 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 41 | 28% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 23 | 16% |
| Chemistry | 16 | 11% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 12 | 8% |
| Engineering | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 19 | 13% |
| Unknown | 28 | 19% |
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 10 October 2013.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,469
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,951
of 219,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#71
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 219,852 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.