↓ Skip to main content

Differential effects of natural rewards and pain on vesicular glutamate transporter expression in the nucleus accumbens

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Brain, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
Differential effects of natural rewards and pain on vesicular glutamate transporter expression in the nucleus accumbens
Published in
Molecular Brain, July 2013
DOI 10.1186/1756-6606-6-32
Pubmed ID
Authors

David S Tukey, Michelle Lee, Duo Xu, Sarah E Eberle, Yossef Goffer, Toby R Manders, Edward B Ziff, Jing Wang

Abstract

Pain and natural rewards such as food elicit different behavioral effects. Both pain and rewards, however, have been shown to alter synaptic activities in the nucleus accumbens (NAc), a key component of the brain reward system. Mechanisms by which external stimuli regulate plasticity at NAc synapses are largely unexplored. Medium spiny neurons (MSNs) from the NAc receive excitatory glutamatergic inputs and modulatory dopaminergic and cholinergic inputs from a variety of cortical and subcortical structures. Glutamate inputs to the NAc arise primarily from prefrontal cortex, thalamus, amygdala, and hippocampus, and different glutamate projections provide distinct synaptic and ultimately behavioral functions. The family of vesicular glutamate transporters (VGLUTs 1-3) plays a key role in the uploading of glutamate into synaptic vesicles. VGLUT1-3 isoforms have distinct expression patterns in the brain, but the effects of external stimuli on their expression patterns have not been studied.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 5%
Netherlands 1 3%
Unknown 37 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 25%
Researcher 6 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Other 3 8%
Other 10 25%
Unknown 3 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 14 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 25%
Psychology 5 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 10%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 4 10%
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 12 August 2013.
All research outputs
#18,343,746
of 22,716,996 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Brain
#857
of 1,103 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,813
of 194,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Brain
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,716,996 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,103 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. 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 194,249 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.