| Title |
Nicotinic Agonists, Antagonists, and Modulators From Natural Sources
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology, June 2005
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10571-005-3968-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
John W. Daly |
| Abstract |
1. Acetylcholine receptors were initially defined as nicotinic or muscarinic, based on selective activation by two natural products, nicotine and muscarine. Several further nicotinic agonists have been discovered from natural sources, including cytisine, anatoxin, ferruginine, anabaseine, epibatidine, and epiquinamide. These have provided lead structures for the design of a wide range of synthetic agents. 2. Natural sources have also provided competitive nicotinic antagonists, such as the Erythrina alkaloids, the tubocurarines, and methyllycaconitine. Noncompetitive antagonists, such as the histrionicotoxins, various izidines, decahydroquinolines, spiropyrrolizidine oximes, pseudophrynamines, ibogaine, strychnine, cocaine, and sparteine have come from natural sources. Finally, galanthamine, codeine, and ivermectin represent positive modulators of nicotinic function, derived from natural sources. 3. Clearly, research on acetylcholine receptors and functions has been dependent on key natural products and the synthetic agents that they inspired. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 148 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Jordan | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 138 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 30 | 20% |
| Researcher | 29 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 7% |
| Other | 26 | 18% |
| Unknown | 24 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 38 | 26% |
| Chemistry | 32 | 22% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 10% |
| Unknown | 31 | 21% |
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 20 April 2012.
All research outputs
#21,358,731
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology
#849
of 1,046 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,919
of 58,527 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,046 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 58,527 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.