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 |
Immunogenic, but Not Steady-State, Antigen Presentation Permits Regulatory T-Cells To Control CD8+ T-Cell Effector Differentiation by IL-2 Modulation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, January 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0085455 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alice McNally, Michael McNally, Ryan Galea, Ranjeny Thomas, Raymond J. Steptoe |
| Abstract |
Absorption of IL-2 is one proposed mechanism of CD4+CD25+FoxP3+ regulatory T cell (Treg) suppression. Direct in vivo experimental evidence for this has recently been obtained. While modulation of IL-2 bioavailability controls CD8+ T-cell effector differentiation under strongly immunogenic conditions it is not known whether Treg modulate CD8+ T cell responses through this mechanism under steady-state conditions. Here we assess this using a mouse model in which dendritic cells (DC) are manipulated to present cognate antigen to CD8+ T cells either in the steady-state or after activation. Our observations show that Treg exert a check on expansion and effector differentiation of CD8+ T cells under strongly immunogenic conditions associated with TLR ligand activation of DC, and this is mediated by limiting IL-2 availability. In contrast, when DC remain unactivated, depletion of Treg has little apparent effect on effector differentiation or IL-2 homeostasis. We conclude that while modulation of IL-2 homeostasis is an important mechanism through which Treg control CD8+ effector differentiation under immunogenic conditions, this mechanism plays little role in modulating CD8+ T-cell differentiation under steady-state conditions. |
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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 15 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 38% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 13% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 19% |
| Unknown | 1 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 25% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 19% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 19% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 1 | 6% |
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 20 September 2014.
All research outputs
#15,290,667
of 22,739,983 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#130,341
of 194,087 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,172
of 306,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,425
of 5,441 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,739,983 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 194,087 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 306,020 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,441 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.