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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Apical targeting of the formin Diaphanous in Drosophila tubular epithelia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
eLife, July 2013
|
| DOI | 10.7554/elife.00666 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tal Rousso, Annette M Shewan, Keith E Mostov, Eyal D Schejter, Ben-Zion Shilo |
| Abstract |
Apical secretion from epithelial tubes of the Drosophila embryo is mediated by apical F-actin cables generated by the formin-family protein Diaphanous (Dia). Apical localization and activity of Dia are at the core of restricting F-actin formation to the correct membrane domain. Here we identify the mechanisms that target Dia to the apical surface. PI(4,5)P2 levels at the apical membrane regulate Dia localization in both the MDCK cyst model and in Drosophila tubular epithelia. An N-terminal basic domain of Dia is crucial for apical localization, implying direct binding to PI(4,5)P2. Dia apical targeting also depends on binding to Rho1, which is critical for activation-induced conformational change, as well as physically anchoring Dia to the apical membrane. We demonstrate that binding to Rho1 facilitates interaction with PI(4,5)P2 at the plane of the membrane. Together these cues ensure efficient and distinct restriction of Dia to the apical membrane. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.00666.001. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 69 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 26% |
| Researcher | 16 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 9% |
| Professor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 12% |
| Unknown | 7 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 28 | 41% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 28 | 41% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 3% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 1% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 8 | 12% |
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 15 July 2013.
All research outputs
#15,866,607
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from eLife
#13,039
of 14,362 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,024
of 195,778 outputs
Outputs of similar age from eLife
#62
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,362 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.8. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 195,778 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.