↓ Skip to main content

Cell-Cell Communication between Malaria-Infected Red Blood Cells via Exosome-like Vesicles

Overview of attention for article published in Cell, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
471 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
758 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
Cell-Cell Communication between Malaria-Infected Red Blood Cells via Exosome-like Vesicles
Published in
Cell, May 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.cell.2013.04.029
Pubmed ID
Authors

Neta Regev-Rudzki, Danny W. Wilson, Teresa G. Carvalho, Xavier Sisquella, Bradley M. Coleman, Melanie Rug, Dejan Bursac, Fiona Angrisano, Michelle Gee, Andrew F. Hill, Jake Baum, Alan F. Cowman

Abstract

Cell-cell communication is an important mechanism for information exchange promoting cell survival for the control of features such as population density and differentiation. We determined that Plasmodium falciparum-infected red blood cells directly communicate between parasites within a population using exosome-like vesicles that are capable of delivering genes. Importantly, communication via exosome-like vesicles promotes differentiation to sexual forms at a rate that suggests that signaling is involved. Furthermore, we have identified a P. falciparum protein, PfPTP2, that plays a key role in efficient communication. This study reveals a previously unidentified pathway of P. falciparum biology critical for survival in the host and transmission to mosquitoes. This identifies a pathway for the development of agents to block parasite transmission from the human host to the mosquito.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 49 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 758 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 <1%
India 4 <1%
France 4 <1%
United Kingdom 4 <1%
Brazil 3 <1%
Kenya 2 <1%
Belgium 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Other 7 <1%
Unknown 724 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 190 25%
Researcher 137 18%
Student > Master 80 11%
Student > Bachelor 69 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 40 5%
Other 112 15%
Unknown 130 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 277 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 158 21%
Immunology and Microbiology 54 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 43 6%
Engineering 15 2%
Other 66 9%
Unknown 145 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 49. 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 19 November 2020.
All research outputs
#873,168
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Cell
#3,538
of 17,318 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,407
of 210,604 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell
#27
of 129 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,318 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 59.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 210,604 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 129 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.