↓ Skip to main content

The response of common marmoset immunity against cedar pollen extract

Overview of attention for article published in BioScience Trends, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
6 Mendeley
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
The response of common marmoset immunity against cedar pollen extract
Published in
BioScience Trends, January 2018
DOI 10.5582/bst.2017.01219
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoshie Kametani, Yuko Yamada, Shuji Takabayashi, Hideki Kato, Kenji Ishiwata, Naohiro Watanabe, Erika Sasaki, Sonoko Habu

Abstract

The in vivo model of pollinosis has been established using rodents, but the model cannot completely mimic human pollinosis. We used Callithrix jacchus, the common marmoset (CM), to establish a pollinosis animal model using intranasal weekly administration of cedar pollen extract with cholera toxin adjuvant. Some of the treated CMs exhibited the symptoms of snitching, excess nasal mucus and/or sneezing, but the period was very short, and the symptoms disappeared after several weeks. The CD4+CD25+ cell ratio in the peripheral blood increased in CMs quickly after the nasal administration of cedar pollen extract, but the timing was not parallel with the symptoms. IL-10 mRNA was enhanced in the peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs), suggesting CM-induced tolerance for cedar pollen administration. Similarly, Foxp3 mRNA was also detected in the PBMC. Additive sensitization of these CMs with Ascaris egg administration did not enhance chronic inflammation of type 1 allergy to induce the symptoms. These results suggest that the environmental immune cells develop transient allergic symptoms and subsequent immune-tolerance in the intranasally sensitized CMs.

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 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 17%
Student > Master 1 17%
Unknown 4 67%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Mathematics 1 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 17%
Unknown 4 67%
Attention Score in Context

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 19 January 2018.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from BioScience Trends
#140
of 333 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#296,556
of 469,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BioScience Trends
#6
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 333 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.9. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 469,130 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 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.