↓ Skip to main content

Analysing calcium signalling of cells under high shear flows using discontinuous dielectrophoresis

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 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
Analysing calcium signalling of cells under high shear flows using discontinuous dielectrophoresis
Published in
Scientific Reports, July 2015
DOI 10.1038/srep11973
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rebecca Soffe, Sara Baratchi, Shi-Yang Tang, Mahyar Nasabi, Peter McIntyre, Arnan Mitchell, Khashayar Khoshmanesh

Abstract

Immobilisation of cells is an important feature of many cellular assays, as it enables the physical/chemical stimulation of cells; whilst, monitoring cellular processes using microscopic techniques. Current approaches for immobilising cells, however, are hampered by time-consuming processes, the need for specific antibodies or coatings, and adverse effects on cell integrity. Here, we present a dielectrophoresis-based approach for the robust immobilisation of cells, and analysis of their responses under high shear flows. This approach is quick and label-free, and more importantly, minimises the adverse effects of electric field on the cell integrity, by activating the field for a short duration of 120 s, just long enough to immobilise the cells, after which cell culture media (such as HEPES) is flushed through the platform. In optimal conditions, at least 90% of the cells remained stably immobilised, when exposed to a shear stress of 63 dyn/cm(2). This approach was used to examine the shear-induced calcium signalling of HEK-293 cells expressing a mechanosensitive ion channel, transient receptor potential vaniloid type 4 (TRPV4), when exposed to the full physiological range of shear stress.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 31%
Researcher 8 18%
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 2 4%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 4 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 18 40%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 11%
Chemistry 5 11%
Materials Science 4 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 6 13%
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 01 April 2016.
All research outputs
#18,449,393
of 22,858,915 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#93,392
of 123,445 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,510
of 263,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#1,412
of 1,943 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,858,915 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 123,445 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 263,747 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,943 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.