↓ Skip to main content

Identification and cloning of localized maternal RNAs from xenopus eggs

Overview of attention for article published in Cell, October 1985
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
patent
1 patent

Readers on

mendeley
91 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
Identification and cloning of localized maternal RNAs from xenopus eggs
Published in
Cell, October 1985
DOI 10.1016/0092-8674(85)90273-9
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

A central question in developmental biology is to explain how cells in different regions of an embryo acquire different developmental fates. We have begun to address this question by investigating whether specific RNAs are localized within a frog egg. Differential screening of a cDNA library shows that most maternal RNAs are uniformly distributed along the animal-vegetal axis. However, we find that a rare class of maternal RNAs is localized. cDNA clones of four localized RNAs have been characterized. Three of these cDNAs are derived from maternal RNAs that are concentrated in the animal hemisphere of unfertilized eggs and remain localized through the early blastula stage. One cDNA is derived from a maternal RNA found almost exclusively in the vegetal hemisphere at both stages. These studies show that some informational molecules, specifically RNAs, are localized in eggs and are inherited by particular blastomeres.

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 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 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 89 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 24%
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Master 9 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Professor 6 7%
Other 19 21%
Unknown 17 19%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 33 36%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 31 34%
Environmental Science 2 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 2%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 18 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 19 July 2016.
All research outputs
#7,015,563
of 32,332,113 outputs
Outputs from Cell
#11,660
of 19,051 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,959
of 14,047 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell
#13
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,332,113 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 19,051 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 63.0. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 14,047 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 58 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 58% of its contemporaries.