↓ Skip to main content

Drosophila spichthyin inhibits BMP signaling and regulates synaptic growth and axonal microtubules

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Neuroscience, January 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

patent
1 patent
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
139 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
117 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
Title
Drosophila spichthyin inhibits BMP signaling and regulates synaptic growth and axonal microtubules
Published in
Nature Neuroscience, January 2007
DOI 10.1038/nn1841
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xinnan Wang, W Robert Shaw, Hilda T H Tsang, Evan Reid, Cahir J O'Kane

Abstract

To understand the functions of NIPA1, mutated in the neurodegenerative disease hereditary spastic paraplegia, and of ichthyin, mutated in autosomal recessive congenital ichthyosis, we have studied their Drosophila melanogaster ortholog, spichthyin (Spict). Spict is found on early endosomes. Loss of Spict leads to upregulation of bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) signaling and expansion of the neuromuscular junction. BMP signaling is also necessary for a normal microtubule cytoskeleton and axonal transport; analysis of loss- and gain-of-function phenotypes indicate that Spict may antagonize this function of BMP signaling. Spict interacts with BMP receptors and promotes their internalization from the plasma membrane, implying that it inhibits BMP signaling by regulating BMP receptor traffic. This is the first demonstration of a role for a hereditary spastic paraplegia protein or ichthyin family member in a specific signaling pathway, and implies disease mechanisms for hereditary spastic paraplegia that involve dependence of the microtubule cytoskeleton on BMP signaling.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
Finland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 110 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 34 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 27%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Student > Master 9 8%
Professor 6 5%
Other 24 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 73 62%
Neuroscience 18 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 9%
Unspecified 6 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 3%
Other 5 4%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 03 August 2010.
All research outputs
#2,485,722
of 10,707,392 outputs
Outputs from Nature Neuroscience
#2,311
of 3,801 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,391,757
of 10,049,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Neuroscience
#2,309
of 3,799 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 10,707,392 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,801 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.8. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 10,049,786 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,799 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.