↓ Skip to main content

Electroporation and DNA‐dependent cell death in murine macrophages

Overview of attention for article published in Immunology & Cell Biology, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
patent
14 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
109 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Electroporation and DNA‐dependent cell death in murine macrophages
Published in
Immunology & Cell Biology, December 2017
DOI 10.1038/icb.1993.8
Pubmed ID
Authors

KATRYN J. STACEY, IAN L. ROSS, DAVID A. HUME

Abstract

The difficulty of transfecting primary macrophages and macrophage cell lines has meant that relatively few studies on regulation of gene expression have been performed in these cells. This study has optimized an electroporation procedure for the macrophage cell line RAW 264, but shows that introduction of DNA into the cytoplasm of primary macrophages by electroporation is toxic to the cells. It is proposed that this cell death may have a physiological role in defence against certain viral infections which result in accumulation of cytoplasmic DNA. RAW 264 cells were efficiently transfected by electroporation, but electroporated bone marrow derived macrophages (BMM) showed large scale cell death over a period of 12 h. Electroporation without DNA was not toxic and DNase treatment of samples before transfection prevented cell death. The toxicity of DNA was concentration-dependent and sequence-independent. Synthetic, genomic and plasmid DNA all caused cell death. This sensitivity to DNA seems to be distinct from the antiviral state induced by double-stranded RNA and may be part of an uncharacterized viral defence system.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 4%
Netherlands 1 2%
Gambia 1 2%
Unknown 49 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 28%
Researcher 11 21%
Student > Master 8 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 6%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 5 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 42%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 15%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 6%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 6 11%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 10 October 2019.
All research outputs
#6,754,036
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Immunology & Cell Biology
#667
of 1,848 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,279
of 447,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Immunology & Cell Biology
#42
of 149 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,848 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 447,786 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 149 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 71% of its contemporaries.