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 |
A Nodal-independent and tissue-intrinsic mechanism controls heart-looping chirality
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Communications, November 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1038/ncomms3754 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Emily S. Noël, Manon Verhoeven, Anne Karine Lagendijk, Federico Tessadori, Kelly Smith, Suma Choorapoikayil, Jeroen den Hertog, Jeroen Bakkers |
| Abstract |
Breaking left-right symmetry in bilateria is a major event during embryo development that is required for asymmetric organ position, directional organ looping and lateralized organ function in the adult. Asymmetric expression of Nodal-related genes is hypothesized to be the driving force behind regulation of organ laterality. Here we identify a Nodal-independent mechanism that drives asymmetric heart looping in zebrafish embryos. In a unique mutant defective for the Nodal-related southpaw gene, preferential dextral looping in the heart is maintained, whereas gut and brain asymmetries are randomized. As genetic and pharmacological inhibition of Nodal signalling does not abolish heart asymmetry, a yet undiscovered mechanism controls heart chirality. This mechanism is tissue intrinsic, as explanted hearts maintain ex vivo retain chiral looping behaviour and require actin polymerization and myosin II activity. We find that Nodal signalling regulates actin gene expression, supporting a model in which Nodal signalling amplifies this tissue-intrinsic mechanism of heart looping. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| Japan | 1 | 20% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | 1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Argentina | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 126 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 49 | 37% |
| Researcher | 20 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 10 | 7% |
| Unknown | 15 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 47 | 35% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 42 | 31% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 7% |
| Engineering | 7 | 5% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 7 | 5% |
| Unknown | 19 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 February 2017.
All research outputs
#1,645,680
of 22,729,647 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#21,439
of 46,784 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,343
of 212,947 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#158
of 395 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,729,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 46,784 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 212,947 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 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 395 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.