↓ Skip to main content

A simplified but robust method for the isolation of avian and mammalian muscle satellite cells

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Molecular and Cell Biology, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
129 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
A simplified but robust method for the isolation of avian and mammalian muscle satellite cells
Published in
BMC Molecular and Cell Biology, June 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2121-13-16
Pubmed ID
Authors

Belinda Baquero-Perez, Suresh V Kuchipudi, Rahul K Nelli, Kin-Chow Chang

Abstract

Current methods of isolation of muscle satellite cells from different animal species are highly variable making inter-species comparisons problematic. This variation mainly stems from the use of different proteolytic enzymes to release the satellite cells from the muscle tissue (sometimes a single enzyme is used but often a combination of enzymes is preferred) and the different extracellular matrix proteins used to coat culture ware. In addition, isolation of satellite cells is frequently laborious and sometimes may require pre-plating of the cell preparation on uncoated flasks or Percoll centrifugation to remove contaminating fibroblasts. The methodology employed to isolate and culture satellite cells in vitro can critically determine the fusion of myoblasts into multi-nucleated myotubes. These terminally differentiated myotubes resemble mature myofibres in the muscle tissue in vivo, therefore optimal fusion is a keystone of in vitro muscle culture. Hence, a simple method of muscle satellite cell isolation and culture of different vertebrate species that can result in a high fusion rate is highly desirable.

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 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 129 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 22%
Student > Master 21 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 13%
Student > Bachelor 15 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 20 16%
Unknown 22 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 41 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 25 19%
Engineering 10 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 8%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 3%
Other 12 9%
Unknown 27 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 23 October 2018.
All research outputs
#3,688,428
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Molecular and Cell Biology
#61
of 1,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,850
of 177,445 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Molecular and Cell Biology
#3
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,233 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 177,445 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.