| Title |
Morphogenetic movements during cranial neural tube closure in the chick embryo and the effect of homocysteine
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brain Structure and Function, August 2005
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00429-005-0005-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Madeleine R. Brouns, Lydia A. Afman, Bart A. M. VanHauten, Johan W. M. Hekking, Eleonore S. Köhler, Henny W. M. van Straaten |
| Abstract |
In order to unravel morphogenetic mechanisms involved in neural tube closure, critical cell movements that are fundamental to remodelling of the cranial neural tube in the chick embryo were studied in vitro by quantitative time-lapse video microscopy. Two main directions of movements were observed. The earliest was directed medially; these cells invaginated into a median groove and were the main contributors to the initial neural tube closure. Once the median groove was completed, cells changed direction and moved anteriorly to contribute to the anterior neural plate and head fold. This plate developed into the anterior neuropore, which started to close from the 4-somite stage onwards by convergence of its neural folds. Posteriorly, from the initial closure site onwards, the posterior neuropore started to close almost instantaneously by convergence of its neural folds. Homocysteine is adversely involved in human neural tube closure defects. After application of a single dose of homocysteine to chick embryos, a closure delay at the initial closure site and at the neuropores, flattening of the head fold and neural tube, and a halt of cell movements was seen. A possible interference of Hcy with actin microfilaments is discussed. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 15% |
| Professor | 1 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 15% |
| Unknown | 1 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 46% |
| Engineering | 2 | 15% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 15% |
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 03 December 2010.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Brain Structure and Function
#1,808
of 2,021 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,203
of 69,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Structure and Function
#10
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 2,021 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. 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 69,130 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 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.