↓ Skip to main content

Abnormal Keratin 1 and 10 Cytoskeleton in Cultured Keratinocytes from Epidermolytic Hyperkeratosis Caused by Keratin 10 Mutations

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Investigative Dermatology, May 1994
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
8 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
Abnormal Keratin 1 and 10 Cytoskeleton in Cultured Keratinocytes from Epidermolytic Hyperkeratosis Caused by Keratin 10 Mutations
Published in
Journal of Investigative Dermatology, May 1994
DOI 10.1111/1523-1747.ep12374270
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marcel Huber, Corinne Scaletta, Messod Benathan, Edgar Frenk, Daniel Hohl, David A Greenhalgh, Joseph A Rothnagel, Dennis R Roop

Abstract

Epidermolytic hyperkeratosis is caused by mutations of the differentiation-specific keratins K1 and K10. These mutations produce a weakened cytoskeleton that is prone to collapse resulting in cell fragility and lysis. In this study we have analyzed cultured keratinocytes from EHK patients bearing 10R-to-H and 15L-to-S mutations within the 1A segment of the K10 rod domain. Keratinocytes were grown submerged in serum-free medium and induced to differentiate by growing to confluence and increasing the Ca++ concentration in the medium. Cultures were either harvested for mRNA sequence analysis or subjected to immunofluorescence microscopy. Differentiating keratinocytes from these patients were found to express these K10 mutations in their mRNA. Moreover, these cells could be distinguished from normal keratinocytes by their aberrant morphology. EHK keratinocytes frequently exhibited a collapsed perinuclear network of K1/K10 filaments and sometimes peripheral granules of K1 and K10 aggregates, reminiscent of the cells of the suprabasal layers in these patients. This report documents the expression of mutant keratin 10 in cultured EHK keratinocytes.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 25%
Student > Master 1 13%
Unknown 5 63%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 13%
Unknown 5 63%
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 18 February 2008.
All research outputs
#8,534,976
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Investigative Dermatology
#3,660
of 8,995 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,459
of 20,879 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Investigative Dermatology
#15
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,995 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 20,879 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.