↓ Skip to main content

The effects of embryonic hypoxic programming on cardiovascular function and autonomic regulation in the American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis) at rest and during swimming

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Comparative Physiology B, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
Title
The effects of embryonic hypoxic programming on cardiovascular function and autonomic regulation in the American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis) at rest and during swimming
Published in
Journal of Comparative Physiology B, September 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00360-018-1181-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

William Joyce, Tiffany E. Miller, Ruth M. Elsey, Tobias Wang, Dane A. Crossley

Abstract

Reptilian embryos naturally experience fluctuating oxygen levels in ovo, and developmental hypoxia has been established to have long-term impacts on cardiovascular function in vertebrates. In the present study, we investigated the impact of developmental 21% (normoxia) and 10% O2 (hypoxia) on juvenile (4-year-old) American alligator cardiovascular function in animals at rest and during swimming. In both experimental groups, combined right aortic and right subclavian blood flow approximately doubled during swimming. Carotid blood flow increased during swimming in the hypoxia-programmed animals only, and both carotid and left aortic blood flow reached higher values in swimming hypoxic-programmed animals compared to the normoxic group. However, pulmonary blood flow, which increased two to threefold during swimming (in both groups), was higher in normoxic-programmed animals at both rest and swimming. The differences between programming groups were preserved after cholinergic blockade (atropine), but reduced by adrenergic receptor antagonists (propranolol and phentolamine). Propranolol and phentolamine also blunted the incremental increases in blood flows during swimming, which was especially clear in the hypoxia-programmed animals. Alteration in adrenergic control and relative cardiac size (which was increased in hypoxic-programmed alligators) may account for the differences between the experimental groups.

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 readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 17%
Student > Master 3 17%
Professor 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Lecturer 1 6%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 4 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 33%
Sports and Recreations 3 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Unspecified 1 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 5 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 16 September 2018.
All research outputs
#19,854,405
of 24,395,432 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Comparative Physiology B
#648
of 840 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#263,945
of 341,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Comparative Physiology B
#6
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,395,432 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 840 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 341,102 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.