↓ Skip to main content

A Novel Flow Cytometric Method To Assess Inflammasome Formation

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Immunology, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
88 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
162 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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.
Title
A Novel Flow Cytometric Method To Assess Inflammasome Formation
Published in
The Journal of Immunology, January 2015
DOI 10.4049/jimmunol.1401110
Pubmed ID
Authors

David P Sester, Sara J Thygesen, Vitaliya Sagulenko, Parimala R Vajjhala, Jasmyn A Cridland, Nazarii Vitak, Kaiwen W Chen, Geoffrey W Osborne, Kate Schroder, Katryn J Stacey

Abstract

Inflammasomes are large protein complexes induced by a wide range of microbial, stress, and environmental stimuli that function to induce cell death and inflammatory cytokine processing. Formation of an inflammasome involves dramatic relocalization of the inflammasome adapter protein apoptosis-associated speck-like protein containing a caspase recruitment domain (ASC) into a single speck. We have developed a flow cytometric assay for inflammasome formation, time of flight inflammasome evaluation, which detects the change in ASC distribution within the cell. The transit of ASC into the speck is detected by a decreased width or increased height of the pulse of emitted fluorescence. This assay can be used to quantify native inflammasome formation in subsets of mixed cell populations ex vivo. It can also provide a rapid and sensitive technique for investigating molecular interactions in inflammasome formation, by comparison of wild-type and mutant proteins in inflammasome reconstitution experiments.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 162 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 155 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 36 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 20%
Student > Bachelor 15 9%
Student > Master 14 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 6%
Other 28 17%
Unknown 26 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 47 29%
Immunology and Microbiology 33 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 25 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 18 11%
Neuroscience 3 2%
Other 5 3%
Unknown 31 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 27 February 2016.
All research outputs
#13,373,196
of 23,567,572 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Immunology
#22,775
of 27,977 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,621
of 356,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Immunology
#111
of 246 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,567,572 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 27,977 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 356,631 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 246 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 54% of its contemporaries.