| Title |
A new generation of human artificial chromosomes for functional genomics and gene therapy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, August 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00018-012-1113-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Natalay Kouprina, William C. Earnshaw, Hiroshi Masumoto, Vladimir Larionov |
| Abstract |
Since their description in the late 1990s, human artificial chromosomes (HACs) carrying a functional kinetochore were considered as a promising system for gene delivery and expression with a potential to overcome many problems caused by the use of viral-based gene transfer systems. Indeed, HACs avoid the limited cloning capacity, lack of copy number control and insertional mutagenesis due to integration into host chromosomes that plague viral vectors. Nevertheless, until recently, HACs have not been widely recognized because of uncertainties of their structure and the absence of a unique gene acceptor site. The situation changed a few years ago after engineering of HACs with a single loxP gene adopter site and a defined structure. In this review, we summarize recent progress made in HAC technology and concentrate on details of two of the most advanced HACs, 21HAC generated by truncation of human chromosome 21 and alphoid(tetO)-HAC generated de novo using a synthetic tetO-alphoid DNA array. Multiple potential applications of the HAC vectors are discussed, specifically the unique features of two of the most advanced HAC cloning systems. |
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 States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 3% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 117 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 28 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 25 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 10% |
| Unknown | 21 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 49 | 40% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 40 | 33% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 2% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 2% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 2% |
| Unknown | 24 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 13 February 2024.
All research outputs
#2,474,783
of 24,090,847 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#335
of 5,565 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,039
of 171,730 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
#4
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,090,847 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,565 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 171,730 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.