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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
CoupTFI Interacts with Retinoic Acid Signaling during Cortical Development
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0058219 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Susan J. Harrison-Uy, Julie A. Siegenthaler, Andrea Faedo, John L. R. Rubenstein, Samuel J. Pleasure |
| Abstract |
We examined the role of the orphan nuclear hormone receptor CoupTFI in mediating cortical development downstream of meningeal retinoic acid signaling. CoupTFI is a regulator of cortical development known to collaborate with retinoic acid (RA) signaling in other systems. To examine the interaction of CoupTFI and cortical RA signaling we utilized Foxc1-mutant mice in which defects in meningeal development lead to alterations in cortical development due to a reduction of RA signaling. By analyzing CoupTFI(-/-);Foxc1(H/L) double mutant mice we provide evidence that CoupTFI is required for RA rescue of the ventricular zone and the neurogenic phenotypes in Foxc1-mutants. We also found that overexpression of CoupTFI in Foxc1-mutants is sufficient to rescue the Foxc1-mutant cortical phenotype in part. These results suggest that CoupTFI collaborates with RA signaling to regulate both cortical ventricular zone progenitor cell behavior and cortical neurogenesis. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 34 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 10 | 28% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 11% |
| Other | 4 | 11% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 44% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 22% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 14% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 4 | 11% |
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 12 March 2013.
All research outputs
#15,266,089
of 22,701,287 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#130,079
of 193,818 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#122,496
of 194,741 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,294
of 5,400 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,701,287 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,818 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 194,741 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,400 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.