↓ Skip to main content

Molecular cloning and expression analysis of mannose receptor in blunt snout bream (Megalobrama amblycephala)

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Biology Reports, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
Title
Molecular cloning and expression analysis of mannose receptor in blunt snout bream (Megalobrama amblycephala)
Published in
Molecular Biology Reports, April 2014
DOI 10.1007/s11033-014-3331-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaoling Liu, Xiaocheng Tang, Li Wang, Jie Li, Hong Wang, Shun Wei, Rui Fang, Wei Ji, Gailing Yuan, Nan Chen, Zemao Gu, Xueqin Liu, Weimin Wang, Muhammad Asim, Yang Zhou, Li Lin

Abstract

Mannose receptor (MR) plays a significant role in innate immune responses to pathogens in vertebrates. Here we characterized the first teleost MR from Megalobrama amblycephala, named maMR and its expression patterns were investigated. The full-length maMR consists of 5,295 bp encoding a putative protein of 1,433 amino acids. The predicted amino acid sequences showed that maMR contained a signal peptide, a cysteine-rich domain, a single fibronectin type II domain, eight tandemly arranged C-type lectin-like domains, a transmembrane domain and a C-terminal cytoplasmic domain. Phylogenetic analysis revealed the highest similarity of maMR with Danio rerio MR predicted by computational analysis. The maMR-mRNAs were ubiquitously transcribed in different tissues, However the highest transcripts were observed in head kidney. Transcripts of maMR significantly increased at the late stages of embryo and continued to be at the high levels after hatching. The maMR transcripts were significantly increased in M. amblycephala after stimulation with killed Aeromonas hydrophila.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 25%
Unspecified 2 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 17%
Researcher 2 17%
Unknown 3 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 2 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 17%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 8%
Unknown 5 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 February 2015.
All research outputs
#14,779,591
of 22,753,345 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Biology Reports
#1,000
of 2,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,345
of 226,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Biology Reports
#15
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,753,345 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,889 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 226,127 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.