↓ Skip to main content

Calcium Wave Propagation in Networks of Endothelial Cells: Model-based Theoretical and Experimental Study

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 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
Calcium Wave Propagation in Networks of Endothelial Cells: Model-based Theoretical and Experimental Study
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, December 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002847
Pubmed ID
Authors

Juexuan Long, Michael Junkin, Pak Kin Wong, James Hoying, Pierre Deymier

Abstract

In this paper, we present a combined theoretical and experimental study of the propagation of calcium signals in multicellular structures composed of human endothelial cells. We consider multicellular structures composed of a single chain of cells as well as a chain of cells with a side branch, namely a "T" structure. In the experiments, we investigate the result of applying mechano-stimulation to induce signaling in the form of calcium waves along the chain and the effect of single and dual stimulation of the multicellular structure. The experimental results provide evidence of an effect of architecture on the propagation of calcium waves. Simulations based on a model of calcium-induced calcium release and cell-to-cell diffusion through gap junctions shows that the propagation of calcium waves is dependent upon the competition between intracellular calcium regulation and architecture-dependent intercellular diffusion.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 4%
Unknown 49 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 20%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Student > Master 5 10%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 5 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 31%
Engineering 10 20%
Physics and Astronomy 6 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 7 14%
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 28 December 2012.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#8,565
of 8,960 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#258,350
of 288,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#111
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 8,960 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. 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 288,779 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 121 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.