↓ Skip to main content

Ultrastructural characterization of interstitial cells of Cajal in the rat small intestine using control and Ws/Ws mutant rats

Overview of attention for article published in Cell and Tissue Research, July 1998
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
52 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
Title
Ultrastructural characterization of interstitial cells of Cajal in the rat small intestine using control and Ws/Ws mutant rats
Published in
Cell and Tissue Research, July 1998
DOI 10.1007/s004410051119
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kazuhide Horiguchi, T. Komuro

Abstract

Interstitial cells in the myenteric plexus and the deep muscular plexus of the small intestine of the c-kit mutant rats (Ws/Ws) and their normal siblings (+/+) were studied. c-Kit immunoreactivity was detected in two regions corresponding to the myenteric plexus and the deep muscular plexus in the jejunum of +/+ rats, while no immunoreactivity was detected in Ws/Ws rats. Using electron microscopy, two types of gap junction-forming interstitial cells were found in association with the myenteric plexus in +/+ rats: one type characterized by a typical fibroblastic ultrastructure, and the other characterized by numerous mitochondria and less electron-dense cytoplasm. Since the latter were greatly reduced in Ws/Ws rats, it was suggested that these cells correspond to c-kit-expressing cells, i.e. interstitial cells of Cajal in the myenteric plexus region. In contrast, two types of interstitial cells in the region of the deep muscular plexus were observed with no difference between +/+ and Ws/Ws rats. Probable interstitial cells of Cajal in this region were characterized by a basal lamina and numerous caveolae as well as large gap junctions that interconnect with each other and with the smooth muscle cells. We concluded that interstitial cells of Cajal in the rat intestine are heterogeneous in ultrastructure, c-kit dependency in the cell maturation, and functional role.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 33%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Student > Bachelor 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 40%
Neuroscience 3 20%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 2 13%
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 25 March 2019.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Cell and Tissue Research
#545
of 2,232 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,344
of 32,510 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell and Tissue Research
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 2,232 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 32,510 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.