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 |
Properties of realgar bioleaching using an extremely acidophilic bacterium and its antitumor mechanism as an anticancer agent
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biological Research, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40659-017-0122-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peng Chen, Ruixiang Xu, Lei Yan, Zhengrong Wu, Yan Wei, Wenbin Zhao, Xin Wang, Qinjian Xie, Hongyu Li |
| Abstract |
Realgar is a naturally occurring arsenic sulfide (or Xionghuang, in Chinese). It contains over 90% tetra-arsenic tetra-sulfide (As4S4). Currently, realgar has been confirmed the antitumor activities, both in vitro and in vivo, of realgar extracted using Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans (A. ferrooxidans). Bioleaching, a new technology to greatly improve the use rate of arsenic extraction from realgar using bacteria, is a novel methodology that addressed a limitation of the traditional method for realgar preparation. The present systematic review reports on the research progress in realgar bioleaching and its antitumor mechanism as an anticancer agent. A total of 93 research articles that report on the biological activity of extracts from realgar using bacteria and its preparation were presented in this review. The realgar bioleaching solution (RBS) works by inducing apoptosis when it is used to treat tumor cells in vitro and in vivo. When it is used to treat animal model organisms in vivo, such as mice and Caenorhabditis elegans, tumor tissues grew more slowly, with mass necrosis. Meanwhile, the agent also showed obvious inhibition of tumor cell growth. Bioleaching technology greatly improves the utilization of realgar and is a novel methodology to improve the traditional method. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 32% |
| Researcher | 5 | 14% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Unknown | 10 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 4 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 24% |
| Unknown | 12 | 32% |
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 25 August 2017.
All research outputs
#17,289,387
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Biological Research
#326
of 642 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#208,884
of 327,324 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biological Research
#9
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 642 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% 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 327,324 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 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.