| Title |
Emerging complexity and new roles for the RIG-I-like receptors in innate antiviral immunity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Virologica Sinica, May 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12250-015-3604-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
John S. Errett, Michael Gale |
| Abstract |
Innate immunity is critical for the control of virus infection and operates to restrict viral susceptibility and direct antiviral immunity for protection from acute or chronic viral-associated diseases including cancer. RIG-I like receptors (RLRs) are cytosolic RNA helicases that function as pathogen recognition receptors to detect RNA pathogen associated molecular patterns (PAMPs) of virus infection. The RLRs include RIG-I, MDA5, and LGP2. They function to recognize and bind to PAMP motifs within viral RNA in a process that directs the RLR to trigger downstream signaling cascades that induce innate immunity that controls viral replication and spread. Products of RLR signaling also serve to modulate the adaptive immune response to infection. Recent studies have additionally connected RLRs to signaling cascades that impart inflammatory and apoptotic responses to virus infection. Viral evasion of RLR signaling supports viral outgrowth and pathogenesis, including the onset of viral-associated cancer. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 30 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 23% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 19% |
| Researcher | 5 | 16% |
| Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 48% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 March 2016.
All research outputs
#22,595,050
of 25,204,906 outputs
Outputs from Virologica Sinica
#523
of 658 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#232,523
of 272,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virologica Sinica
#9
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,204,906 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 658 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 272,126 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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.