↓ Skip to main content

Composite bottlebrush mechanics: α-internexin fine-tunes neurofilament network properties

Overview of attention for article published in Soft Matter, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
41 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.
Article details
Title
Composite bottlebrush mechanics: α-internexin fine-tunes neurofilament network properties
Published in
Soft Matter, January 2015
DOI 10.1039/c5sm00662g
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Neuronal cytoplasmic intermediate filaments are principal structural and mechanical elements of the axon. Their expression during embryonic development follows a differential pattern, while their unregulated expression is correlated to neurodegenerative diseases. The largest neurofilament proteins of medium (NF-M) and high molecular weight (NF-H) were shown to modulate the axonal architecture and inter-filament spacing. However, the individual roles of the remaining α-internexin (α-Inx) and neurofilament of low molecular weight (NF-L) proteins in composite filaments remained elusive. In contrast to previous predictions, we show that when co-assembled with NF-M, the shortest and the least charged α-Inx protein increases inter-filament spacing. These findings suggest a novel structural explanation for the expression pattern of neurofilament proteins during embryonic development. We explain our results by an analysis of ionic cross-links between the disordered polyampholytic C-terminal tails and suggest that a collapsed conformation of the α-Inx tail domain interferes with tail cross-linking near the filament backbone.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Israel 1 2%
Unknown 40 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 24%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Researcher 4 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 10%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 9 22%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Physics and Astronomy 14 34%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 10%
Chemistry 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 10 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 24 June 2015.
All research outputs
#14,229,946
of 22,813,792 outputs
Outputs from Soft Matter
#3,253
of 8,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,760
of 353,106 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Soft Matter
#144
of 424 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,813,792 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,110 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. 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 353,106 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 424 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 63% of its contemporaries.