↓ Skip to main content

Novel Frataxin Isoforms May Contribute to the Pathological Mechanism of Friedreich Ataxia

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, October 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.
Title
Novel Frataxin Isoforms May Contribute to the Pathological Mechanism of Friedreich Ataxia
Published in
PLOS ONE, October 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0047847
Pubmed ID
Authors

Haiyan Xia, Yun Cao, Xiaoman Dai, Zvonimir Marelja, Di Zhou, Ran Mo, Sahar Al-Mahdawi, Mark A. Pook, Silke Leimkühler, Tracey A. Rouault, Kuanyu Li

Abstract

Friedreich ataxia (FRDA) is an inherited neurodegenerative disease caused by frataxin (FXN) deficiency. The nervous system and heart are the most severely affected tissues. However, highly mitochondria-dependent tissues, such as kidney and liver, are not obviously affected, although the abundance of FXN is normally high in these tissues. In this study we have revealed two novel FXN isoforms (II and III), which are specifically expressed in affected cerebellum and heart tissues, respectively, and are functional in vitro and in vivo. Increasing the abundance of the heart-specific isoform III significantly increased the mitochondrial aconitase activity, while over-expression of the cerebellum-specific isoform II protected against oxidative damage of Fe-S cluster-containing aconitase. Further, we observed that the protein level of isoform III decreased in FRDA patient heart, while the mRNA level of isoform II decreased more in FRDA patient cerebellum compared to total FXN mRNA. Our novel findings are highly relevant to understanding the mechanism of tissue-specific pathology in FRDA.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 81 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 22%
Researcher 10 12%
Student > Master 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 21 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 28%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 22 27%
Neuroscience 5 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 26 31%
Attention Score in Context

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 18 October 2012.
All research outputs
#15,253,344
of 22,681,577 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#129,937
of 193,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,901
of 175,485 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,930
of 4,760 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,681,577 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,576 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 175,485 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 4,760 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.