↓ Skip to main content

Expression cloning of rat renal Na+/SO4(2-) cotransport.

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, September 1993
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
140 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
Expression cloning of rat renal Na+/SO4(2-) cotransport.
Published in
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, September 1993
DOI 10.1073/pnas.90.17.8073
Pubmed ID
Authors

D Markovich, J Forgo, G Stange, J Biber, H Murer

Abstract

Injection of rat kidney cortex mRNA into Xenopus laevis oocytes leads to a stimulation of Na(+)-dependent SO4(2-) uptake. Based on this information, we have isolated from a corresponding library a cDNA (NaSi-1) that is most likely related to a Na+/SO4(2-) cotransport system. NaSi-1 cRNA leads in a time- and dose-dependent manner to specific stimulation of Na(+)-dependent SO4(2-) uptake in oocytes. The apparent affinity constants of the NaSi-1 cRNA-expressed transport resemble those of Na+/SO4(2-) cotransport in brush-border membrane. The NaSi-1 cDNA contains 2239 bp [including a poly(A) tail] and encodes a protein of 595 amino acids (66.05 kDa); the hydropathy profile suggests at least eight membrane-spanning regions. In vitro translation of NaSi-1 cRNA results in a protein of the expected size and suggests glycosylation. Northern blot analysis shows signals of 2.3 and 2.9 kb in kidney (more abundant in cortex than in papilla/medulla) and in mucosa of small intestine of rats. The above data indicate that we have structurally identified a membrane protein involved in renal and small-intestinal brush-border membrane Na+/SO4(2-) cotransport.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 21%
Professor 2 14%
Student > Master 2 14%
Other 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 2 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 36%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 29%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 7%
Unknown 3 21%
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 26 October 2012.
All research outputs
#8,219,054
of 24,625,114 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#64,491
of 101,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,140
of 20,624 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#188
of 351 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,625,114 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 101,438 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.8. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 20,624 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 351 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.