↓ Skip to main content

DSCAM Promotes Refinement in the Mouse Retina through Cell Death and Restriction of Exploring Dendrites

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neuroscience, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
DSCAM Promotes Refinement in the Mouse Retina through Cell Death and Restriction of Exploring Dendrites
Published in
Journal of Neuroscience, April 2015
DOI 10.1523/jneurosci.2202-14.2015
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

In this study we develop and use a gain-of-function mouse allele of the Down syndrome cell adhesion molecule (Dscam) to complement loss-of-function models. We assay the role of Dscam in promoting cell death, spacing, and laminar targeting of neurons in the developing mouse retina. We find that ectopic or overexpression of Dscam is sufficient to drive cell death. Gain-of-function studies indicate that Dscam is not sufficient to increase spatial organization, prevent cell-to-cell pairing, or promote active avoidance in the mouse retina, despite the similarity of the Dscam loss-of-function phenotype in the mouse retina to phenotypes observed in Drosophila Dscam1 mutants. Both gain- and loss-of-function studies support a role for Dscam in targeting neurites; DSCAM is necessary for precise dendrite lamination, and is sufficient to retarget neurites of outer retinal cells after ectopic expression. We further demonstrate that DSCAM guides dendrite targeting in type 2 dopaminergic amacrine cells, by restricting the stratum in which exploring retinal dendrites stabilize, in a Dscam dosage-dependent manner. Based on these results we propose a single model to account for the numerous Dscam gain- and loss-of-function phenotypes reported in the mouse retina whereby DSCAM eliminates inappropriately placed cells and connections.

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 profile of 1 X user 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 59 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 1 2%
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 57 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 29%
Researcher 15 25%
Student > Master 6 10%
Professor 3 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 7 12%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 37%
Neuroscience 22 37%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 3%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 7 12%
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 10 April 2015.
All research outputs
#27,913,526
of 34,575,175 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neuroscience
#20,744
of 23,429 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,388
of 308,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neuroscience
#302
of 365 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,575,175 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 23,429 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 308,823 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 365 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.