| Title |
Multiaxial Polarity Determines Individual Cellular and Nuclear Chirality
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cellular and Molecular Bioengineering, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12195-016-0467-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael J. Raymond, Poulomi Ray, Gurleen Kaur, Michael Fredericks, Ajay V. Singh, Leo Q. Wan |
| Abstract |
Intrinsic cell chirality has been implicated in the left-right (LR) asymmetry of embryonic development. Impaired cell chirality could lead to severe birth defects in laterality. Previously, we detected cell chirality with an in vitro micropatterning system. Here, we demonstrate for the first time that chirality can be quantified as the coordination of multiaxial polarization of individual cells and nuclei. Using an object labeling, connected component based method, we characterized cell chirality based on cell and nuclear shape polarization and nuclear positioning of each cell in multicellular patterns of epithelial cells. We found that the cells adopted a LR bias the boundaries by positioning the sharp end towards the leading edge and leaving the nucleus at the rear. This behavior is consistent with the directional migration observed previously on the boundary of micropatterns. Although the nucleus is chirally aligned, it is not strongly biased towards or away from the boundary. As the result of the rear positioning of nuclei, the nuclear positioning has an opposite chirality to that of cell alignment. Overall, our results have revealed deep insights of chiral morphogenesis as the coordination of multiaxial polarization at the cellular and subcellular levels. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 17 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 18% |
| Researcher | 2 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Professor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 24% |
| Unknown | 4 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 18% |
| Engineering | 2 | 12% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 6% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 6% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 24% |
| Unknown | 5 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 October 2016.
All research outputs
#13,995,422
of 22,896,955 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Bioengineering
#233
of 459 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#178,049
of 322,327 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Bioengineering
#6
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,896,955 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 459 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 322,327 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.