↓ Skip to main content

Natural Killer Cells

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 473: Lessons from NK Cell Deficiencies in the Mouse.
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
13 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.
Chapter title
Lessons from NK Cell Deficiencies in the Mouse.
Chapter number 473
Book title
Natural Killer Cells
Published in
Current topics in microbiology and immunology, September 2015
DOI 10.1007/82_2015_473
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-923915-6, 978-3-31-923916-3
Authors

Deauvieau, Florence, Fenis, Aurore, Dalençon, François, Burdin, Nicolas, Vivier, Eric, Kerdiles, Yann, Florence Deauvieau, Aurore Fenis, François Dalençon, Nicolas Burdin, Eric Vivier, Yann Kerdiles

Abstract

Since their discovery in the late 1970s, in vivo studies on mouse natural killer (NK) cell almost entirely relied on the use of depleting antibodies and were associated with significant limitations. More recently, large-scale gene-expression analyses allowed the identification of NKp46 as one of the best markers of NK cells across mammalian species. Since then, NKp46 has been shown to be expressed on other subsets of innate lymphoid cells (ILCs) such as the closely related ILC1 and the mucosa-associated NCR(+) ILC3. Based on this marker, several mouse models specifically targeting NKp46-expressing cell have recently been produced. Here, we review recent advances in the generation of models of deficiency in NKp46-expressing cells and their use to address the role of NK cells in immunity, notably on the regulation of adaptive immune responses.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 38%
Researcher 3 23%
Student > Master 2 15%
Professor 1 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 23%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 3 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 01 July 2016.
All research outputs
#14,238,817
of 22,829,083 outputs
Outputs from Current topics in microbiology and immunology
#390
of 680 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,136
of 273,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current topics in microbiology and immunology
#10
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,083 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 680 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 273,246 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.