| Title |
Sequence variation in the CHAT locus shows no association with late-onset Alzheimer's disease
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Human Genetics, May 2003
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00439-003-0960-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Denise Harold, Timothy Peirce, Valentina Moskvina, Amanda Myers, Susan Jones, Paul Hollingworth, Pamela Moore, Simon Lovestone, John Powell, Catherine Foy, Nicola Archer, Sarah Walter, Amanda Edmonson, Stephen McIlroy, David Craig, Peter A. Passmore, Alison Goate, John Hardy, Michael O'Donovan, Julie Williams, Malcolm Liddell, Michael J. Owen, Lesley Jones |
| Abstract |
There is substantial evidence for a susceptibility gene for late-onset Alzheimer's disease (AD) on chromosome 10. One of the characteristic features of AD is the degeneration and dysfunction of the cholinergic system. The genes encoding choline acetyltransferase (ChAT) and its vesicular transporter (VAChT), CHAT and SLC18A3 respectively, map to the linked region of chromosome 10 and are therefore both positional and obvious functional candidate genes for late-onset AD. We have screened both genes for sequence variants and investigated each for association with late-onset AD in up to 500 late-onset AD cases and 500 control DNAs collected in the UK. We detected a total of 17 sequence variants. Of these, 14 were in CHAT, comprising three non-synonymous variants (D7N in the S exon, A120T in exon 5 and L243F in exon 8), one synonymous change (H547H), nine single-nucleotide polymorphisms in intronic, untranslated or promoter regions, and a variable number of tandem repeats in intron 7. Three non-coding SNPs were detected in SLC18A3. None demonstrated any reproducible association with late-onset AD in our samples. Levels of linkage disequilibrium were generally low across the CHAT locus but two of the coding variants, D7N and A120T, proved to be in complete linkage disequilibrium. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor | 5 | 36% |
| Other | 3 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 7% |
| Researcher | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 36% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 21% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 7% |
| Psychology | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 14% |
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 February 2014.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Human Genetics
#1,014
of 2,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,563
of 54,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Genetics
#5
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 2,957 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 54,068 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.