↓ Skip to main content

The role and regulation of MAFbx/atrogin-1 and MuRF1 in skeletal muscle atrophy

Overview of attention for article published in Pflügers Archiv - European Journal of Physiology, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
patent
3 patents
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
274 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
332 Mendeley
Title
The role and regulation of MAFbx/atrogin-1 and MuRF1 in skeletal muscle atrophy
Published in
Pflügers Archiv - European Journal of Physiology, January 2011
DOI 10.1007/s00424-010-0919-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Victoria C. Foletta, Lloyd J. White, Amy E. Larsen, Bertrand Léger, Aaron P. Russell

Abstract

Skeletal muscle atrophy occurs in many chronic diseases and disuse conditions. Its severity reduces patient recovery, independence and quality of life. The discovery of two muscle-specific E3 ubiquitin ligases, MAFbx/atrogin-1 and Muscle RING Finger-1 (MuRF1), promoted an expectation of these molecules as targets for therapeutic development. While numerous studies have determined the conditions in which MAFbx/atrogin-1 and MuRF1 mRNA levels are regulated, few studies have investigated their functional role in skeletal muscle. Recently, studies identifying new target substrates for MAFbx/atrogin-1 and MuRF1, outside of their response to the initiation of muscle atrophy, suggest that there is more to these proteins than previously appreciated. This review will highlight our present knowledge of MAFbx/atrogin-1 and MuRF1 in skeletal muscle atrophy, the impact of potential therapeutics and their known regulators and substrates. Finally, we will comment on new approaches that may expand our knowledge of these two molecules in their control of skeletal muscle function.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 332 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 4 1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 319 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 65 20%
Student > Master 63 19%
Researcher 38 11%
Student > Bachelor 35 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 7%
Other 57 17%
Unknown 52 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 76 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 65 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 43 13%
Sports and Recreations 27 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 5%
Other 38 11%
Unknown 65 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 28 March 2023.
All research outputs
#2,985,177
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from Pflügers Archiv - European Journal of Physiology
#99
of 1,973 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,282
of 185,874 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pflügers Archiv - European Journal of Physiology
#1
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,973 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 185,874 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them