↓ Skip to main content

RETRACTED: A mathematical model explains saturating axon guidance responses to molecular gradients

Overview of attention for article published in eLife, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
974 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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.
Title
RETRACTED: A mathematical model explains saturating axon guidance responses to molecular gradients
Published in
eLife, February 2016
DOI 10.7554/elife.12248
Pubmed ID
Authors

Huyen Nguyen, Peter Dayan, Zac Pujic, Justin Cooper-White, Geoffrey J Goodhill

Abstract

Correct wiring is crucial for the proper functioning of the nervous system. Molecular gradients provide critical signals to guide growth cones, which are the motile tips of developing axons, to their targets. However, in vitro, growth cones trace highly stochastic trajectories, and exactly how molecular gradients bias their movement is unclear. Here, we introduce a mathematical model based on persistence, bias, and noise to describe this behaviour, constrained directly by measurements of the detailed statistics of growth cone movements in both attractive and repulsive gradients in a microfluidic device. This model provides a mathematical explanation for why average axon turning angles in gradients in vitro saturate very rapidly with time at relatively small values. This work introduces the most accurate predictive model of growth cone trajectories to date, and deepens our understanding of axon guidance events both in vitro and in vivo.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 2%
Unknown 44 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 24%
Researcher 8 18%
Student > Master 7 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 9%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 4 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 9 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 20%
Engineering 3 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Computer Science 3 7%
Other 12 27%
Unknown 6 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 02 February 2020.
All research outputs
#3,469,643
of 24,618,075 outputs
Outputs from eLife
#8,254
of 15,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,391
of 407,161 outputs
Outputs of similar age from eLife
#134
of 346 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,618,075 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,047 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.6. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 407,161 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 346 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 61% of its contemporaries.