↓ Skip to main content

Insulin secretory granules control autophagy in pancreatic β cells

Overview of attention for article published in Science, February 2015
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 (91st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users
patent
3 patents
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages
reddit
1 Redditor
guideline
1 clinical guideline source

Readers on

mendeley
231 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.
Article details
Title
Insulin secretory granules control autophagy in pancreatic β cells
Published in
Science, February 2015
DOI 10.1126/science.aaa2628
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Pancreatic β cells lower insulin release in response to nutrient depletion. The question of whether starved β cells induce macroautophagy, a predominant mechanism maintaining energy homeostasis, remains poorly explored. We found that, in contrast to many mammalian cells, macroautophagy in pancreatic β cells was suppressed upon starvation. Instead, starved β cells induced lysosomal degradation of nascent secretory insulin granules, which was controlled by protein kinase D (PKD), a key player in secretory granule biogenesis. Starvation-induced nascent granule degradation triggered lysosomal recruitment and activation of mechanistic target of rapamycin that suppressed macroautophagy. Switching from macroautophagy to insulin granule degradation was important to keep insulin secretion low upon fasting. Thus, β cells use a PKD-dependent mechanism to adapt to nutrient availability and couple autophagy flux to secretory function.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 231 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 2 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 225 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 45 19%
Researcher 39 17%
Student > Master 18 8%
Student > Bachelor 17 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 16 7%
Other 47 20%
Unknown 49 21%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 63 27%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 56 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 29 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 3%
Chemistry 6 3%
Other 18 8%
Unknown 53 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. 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 07 April 2024.
All research outputs
#2,395,532
of 34,457,357 outputs
Outputs from Science
#31,152
of 94,128 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,245
of 295,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#763
of 1,368 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,457,357 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 94,128 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 66.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% 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 295,529 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,368 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.