↓ Skip to main content

Multiple death pathways in retina-derived 661W cells following growth factor deprivation: crosstalk between caspases and calpains

Overview of attention for article published in Cell Death & Differentiation, April 2005
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

pinterest
1 Pinner

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
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
Multiple death pathways in retina-derived 661W cells following growth factor deprivation: crosstalk between caspases and calpains
Published in
Cell Death & Differentiation, April 2005
DOI 10.1038/sj.cdd.4401621
Pubmed ID
Authors

V Gómez-Vicente, M Donovan, T G Cotter

Abstract

During development of the mammalian retina, neurons that do not succeed in establishing functional synaptic connections are eliminated by apoptosis, allowing the formation of a finely tuned network. Growth factors play a crucial role in controlling the balance between apoptosis and survival signals not only at developmental stages but also in long-term preservation of retinal functions. In the present work, we explore the apoptotic mechanisms triggered by growth factor deprivation of retina-derived 661W cells. Under serum starvation conditions, these cone photoreceptors underwent cell death with participation of caspase-9, -3 and -12. Interestingly, inhibition of caspases did not prevent apoptosis but only resulted in a temporary delay. We show m-calpain activation in parallel with caspases, indicating that more than one execution pathway is available to cone photoreceptors. Moreover, crosstalk of the caspase and calpain pathways was detected, suggesting a loop that may act to amplify the apoptotic cascade.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 3%
Portugal 1 3%
Unknown 36 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 29%
Researcher 10 26%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 4 11%
Student > Master 2 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 50%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 4 11%
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 04 February 2013.
All research outputs
#20,180,477
of 22,694,633 outputs
Outputs from Cell Death & Differentiation
#2,851
of 3,000 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,154
of 57,836 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell Death & Differentiation
#36
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,694,633 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,000 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 57,836 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.