
doi: 10.1038/1901113a0
pmid: 13784651
I WISH to suggest a revision in the practice of discussing proteins in terms of primary, secondary, andtertiary structures. This terminology, introduced by Linderstrom-Lang in his Lane Memorial Lectures1, served well in the few years since it was invented, and has thoroughly permeated the literature. Developments since that time have lessened its usefulness. Arguments to demonstrate this, and suggestions for a more useful general terminology, are the substance of this communication.
Proteins
Proteins
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 17 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 1% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
