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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Distinct mechanisms underlie oral vs aboral regeneration in the cnidarian Hydractinia echinata
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
eLife, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.7554/elife.05506 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Brian Bradshaw, Kerry Thompson, Uri Frank |
| Abstract |
Cnidarians possess remarkable powers of regeneration, but the cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying this capability are unclear. Studying the hydrozoan Hydractinia echinata we show that a burst of stem cell proliferation occurs following decapitation, forming a blastema at the oral pole within 24 hours. This process is necessary for head regeneration. Knocking down Piwi1, Vasa, Pl10 or Ncol1 expressed by blastema cells inhibited regeneration but not blastema formation. EdU pulse-chase experiments and in vivo tracking of individual transgenic Piwi1+ stem cells showed that the cellular source for blastema formation is migration of stem cells from a remote area. Surprisingly, no blastema developed at the aboral pole after stolon removal. Instead, polyps transformed into stolons and then budded polyps. Hence, distinct mechanisms act to regenerate different organs in Hydractinia. This model, where stem cell behavior can be monitored in vivo at single cell resolution, offers new insights for regenerative biology. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 17% |
| United States | 1 | 17% |
| Ireland | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 3 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 4 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 113 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 108 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 33 | 29% |
| Researcher | 15 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 10% |
| Other | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 13% |
| Unknown | 19 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 39 | 35% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 35 | 31% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 3% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 3% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Unknown | 21 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 19 November 2023.
All research outputs
#2,340,677
of 24,836,260 outputs
Outputs from eLife
#6,551
of 15,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#29,419
of 270,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age from eLife
#80
of 226 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,836,260 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,171 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% 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 270,230 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 226 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.