↓ Skip to main content

Getting to the heart of intraflagellar transport using Trypanosoma and Chlamydomonas models: the strength is in their differences

Overview of attention for article published in Cilia, November 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
Getting to the heart of intraflagellar transport using Trypanosoma and Chlamydomonas models: the strength is in their differences
Published in
Cilia, November 2013
DOI 10.1186/2046-2530-2-16
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benjamin Morga, Philippe Bastin

Abstract

Cilia and flagella perform diverse roles in motility and sensory perception, and defects in their construction or their function are responsible for human genetic diseases termed ciliopathies. Cilia and flagella construction relies on intraflagellar transport (IFT), the bi-directional movement of 'trains' composed of protein complexes found between axoneme microtubules and the flagellum membrane. Although extensive information about IFT components and their mode of action were discovered in the green algae Chlamydomonas reinhardtii, other model organisms have revealed further insights about IFT. This is the case of Trypanosoma brucei, a flagellated protist responsible for sleeping sickness that is turning out to be an emerging model for studying IFT. In this article, we review different aspects of IFT, based on studies of Chlamydomonas and Trypanosoma. Data available from both models are examined to ask challenging questions about IFT such as the initiation of flagellum construction, the setting-up of IFT and the mode of formation of IFT trains, and their remodeling at the tip as well as their recycling at the base. Another outstanding question is the individual role played by the multiple IFT proteins. The use of different models, bringing their specific biological and experimental advantages, will be invaluable in order to obtain a global understanding of IFT.

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 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Czechia 1 2%
France 1 2%
Unknown 57 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 25%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 10%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 9 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 31%
Physics and Astronomy 3 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 11 18%
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 03 December 2013.
All research outputs
#18,355,685
of 22,733,113 outputs
Outputs from Cilia
#69
of 91 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,984
of 306,996 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cilia
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,733,113 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 91 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% 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 306,996 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 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.