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 |
Cadmium-induced apoptosis of Siberian tiger fibroblasts via disrupted intracellular homeostasis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biological Research, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40659-016-0103-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hui Wang, Zheng Liu, Wenxiu Zhang, Ziao Yuan, Hongyi Yuan, Xueting Liu, Chunwen Yang, Weijun Guan |
| Abstract |
Heavy metals can cause great harm to Siberian tigers in the natural environment. Cadmium (Cd(2+)) is an environmental contaminant that affects multiple cellular processes, including cell proliferation, differentiation, and survival. It has been shown to induce apoptosis in a variety of cell types and tissues. We investigated the apoptotic effects of Cd(2+) on Siberian tiger fibroblasts in vitro. Our research revealed the typical signs of apoptosis after Cd(2+) exposure. Apoptosis was dose- (0-4.8 μM) and duration-dependent (12-48 h), and proliferation was strongly inhibited. Cd(2+) increased the activity of caspase-3, -8, and -9 and disrupted calcium homeostasis by causing oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction. It also increased K(+) efflux and altered the mRNA levels of Bax, Bcl-2, caspase-3, caspase-8, Fas, and p53. Our results suggest that Cd(2+) triggers the apoptosis of Siberian tiger fibroblasts by disturbing intracellular homeostasis. These results will aid in our understanding of the effects of Cd(2+) on Siberian tigers and in developing interventions to treat and prevent cadmium poisoning. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 14% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 7% |
| Researcher | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 50% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Environmental Science | 2 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 8 | 57% |
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 30 August 2017.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Biological Research
#326
of 642 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,337
of 320,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biological Research
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 320,942 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 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.