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 |
Effect of ECM2 expression on bovine skeletal muscle‐derived satellite cell differentiation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cell Biology International, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1002/cbin.10927 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Chang Liu, Huili Tong, Shufeng Li, Yunqin Yan |
| Abstract |
Extracellular matrix components have important regulatory functions during cell proliferation and differentiation. In recent study, extracellular matrix were shown to have a strong effect on skeletal muscle differentiation. Here, we aimed to elucidate the effects of extracellular matrix protein 2 (ECM2), an extracellular matrix component, on the differentiation of bovine skeletal muscle-derived satellite cells (MDSCs). Western blot and immunofluorescence analyses were used to elucidate the ECM2 expression pattern in bovine MDSCs during differentiation in vitro. CRISPR/Cas9 technology was used to activate or inhibit ECM2 expression to study its effects on the in vitro differentiation of bovine MDSCs. ECM2 expression was shown to increase gradually during bovine MDSC differentiation, and the levels of this protein were higher in more highly differentiated myotubes. ECM2 activation promoted MDSC differentiation, whereas its suppression inhibited the differentiation of these cells. Here, for the first time, we demonstrated the importance of ECM2 expression during bovine MDSC differentiation; these results could lead to treatments that help to increase beef cattle muscularity. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 9 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 33% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 33% |
| Other | 1 | 11% |
| Researcher | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 1 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 56% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 1 | 11% |
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 11 September 2018.
All research outputs
#19,917,373
of 24,477,448 outputs
Outputs from Cell Biology International
#710
of 1,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#261,679
of 334,439 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell Biology International
#11
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,477,448 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,155 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 334,439 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.