| Title |
Good, Bad, or Ugly: the Biological Roles of Bone Marrow Fat
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Current Osteoporosis Reports, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11914-018-0427-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lakshman Singh, Sonia Tyagi, Damian Myers, Gustavo Duque |
| Abstract |
Bone marrow fat expresses mixed characteristics, which could correspond to white, brown, and beige types of fat. Marrow fat could act as either energy storing and adipokine secreting white fat or as a source of energy for hematopoiesis and bone metabolism, thus acting as brown fat. However, there is also a negative interaction between marrow fat and other elements of the bone marrow milieu, which is known as lipotoxicity. In this review, we will describe the good and bad roles of marrow fat in the bone, while focusing on the specific components of the negative effect of marrow fat on bone metabolism. Lipotoxicity in the bone is exerted by bone marrow fat through the secretion of adipokines and free fatty acids (FFA) (predominantly palmitate). High levels of FFA found in the bone marrow of aged and osteoporotic bone are associated with decreased osteoblastogenesis and bone formation, decreased hematopoiesis, and increased osteoclastogenesis. In addition, FFA such as palmitate and stearate induce apoptosis and dysfunctional autophagy in the osteoblasts, thus affecting their differentiation and function. Regulation of marrow fat could become a therapeutic target for osteoporosis. Inhibition of the synthesis of FFA by marrow fat could facilitate osteoblastogenesis and bone formation while affecting osteoclastogenesis. However, further studies testing this hypothesis are still required. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 14% |
| Spain | 1 | 14% |
| Canada | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 57% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 57% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 14% |
| Scientists | 1 | 14% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 14% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 54 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 20% |
| Researcher | 7 | 13% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 4% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 15% |
| Unknown | 22 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 13% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Sports and Recreations | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 21 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 20 December 2018.
All research outputs
#6,979,668
of 23,511,526 outputs
Outputs from Current Osteoporosis Reports
#139
of 564 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#119,419
of 331,429 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Osteoporosis Reports
#4
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,511,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 564 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 331,429 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.