↓ Skip to main content

Mechanisms of ciliogenesis suppression in dividing cells

Overview of attention for article published in Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
64 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 Mendeley
Title
Mechanisms of ciliogenesis suppression in dividing cells
Published in
Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, September 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00018-016-2369-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hidemasa Goto, Hironori Inaba, Masaki Inagaki

Abstract

The primary cilium is a non-motile and microtubule-enriched protrusion ensheathed by plasma membrane. Primary cilia function as mechano/chemosensors and signaling hubs and their disorders predispose to a wide spectrum of human diseases. Most types of cells assemble their primary cilia in response to cellular quiescence, whereas they start to retract the primary cilia upon cell-cycle reentry. The retardation of ciliary resorption process has been shown to delay cell-cycle progression to the S or M phase after cell-cycle reentry. Apart from this conventional concept of ciliary disassembly linked to cell-cycle reentry, recent studies have led to a novel concept, suggesting that cells can suppress primary cilia assembly during cell proliferation. Accumulating evidence has also demonstrated the importance of Aurora-A (a protein originally identified as one of mitotic kinases) not only in ciliary resorption after cell-cycle reentry but also in the suppression of ciliogenesis in proliferating cells, whereas Aurora-A activators are clearly distinct in both phenomena. Here, we summarize the current knowledge of how cycling cells suppress ciliogenesis and compare it with mechanisms underlying ciliary resorption after cell-cycle reentry. We also discuss a reciprocal relationship between primary cilia and cell proliferation.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 101 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 20%
Researcher 19 19%
Student > Master 14 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 9 9%
Unknown 24 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 36 36%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 7%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 26 26%
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 17 February 2017.
All research outputs
#21,141,111
of 23,794,258 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#3,769
of 4,151 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,281
of 325,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#50
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,794,258 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 4,151 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. 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 325,235 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 55 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.