↓ Skip to main content

A canine DNM1 mutation is highly associated with the syndrome of exercise-induced collapse

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Genetics, September 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
patent
2 patents
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
A canine DNM1 mutation is highly associated with the syndrome of exercise-induced collapse
Published in
Nature Genetics, September 2008
DOI 10.1038/ng.224
Pubmed ID
Authors

Edward E Patterson, Katie M Minor, Anna V Tchernatynskaia, Susan M Taylor, G Diane Shelton, Kari J Ekenstedt, James R Mickelson

Abstract

Labrador retrievers are the most common dog breed in the world, with over 200,000 new kennel club registrations per year. The syndrome of exercise-induced collapse (EIC) in this breed is manifested by muscle weakness, incoordination and life-threatening collapse after intense exercise. Using a genome-wide microsatellite marker scan for linkage in pedigrees, we mapped the EIC locus to canine chromosome 9. We then used SNP association and haplotype analysis to fine map the locus, and identified a mutation in the dynamin 1 gene (DNM1) that causes an R256L substitution in a highly conserved region of the protein. This first documented mammalian DNM1 mutation is present at a high frequency in the breed and is a compelling candidate causal mutation for EIC, as the dynamin 1 protein has an essential role in neurotransmission and synaptic vesicle endocytosis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 73 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 15%
Other 9 12%
Student > Postgraduate 7 9%
Professor 5 7%
Other 22 29%
Unknown 7 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 19 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 12%
Social Sciences 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 11 15%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 20 January 2020.
All research outputs
#1,847,470
of 15,465,490 outputs
Outputs from Nature Genetics
#2,583
of 6,436 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,623
of 159,641 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Genetics
#51
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,465,490 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,436 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
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 159,641 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.