↓ Skip to main content

Drosophila Models for Human Diseases

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 8: Drosophila as a Model to Gain Insight into the Role of lncRNAs in Neurological Disorders
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
26 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
Drosophila as a Model to Gain Insight into the Role of lncRNAs in Neurological Disorders
Chapter number 8
Book title
Drosophila Models for Human Diseases
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/978-981-13-0529-0_8
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-9-81-130528-3, 978-9-81-130529-0
Authors

Luca Lo Piccolo, Lo Piccolo, Luca

Abstract

It is now clear that the majority of transcription in humans results in the production of long non-protein-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) with a variable length spanning from 200 bp up to several kilobases. To date, we have a limited understanding of the lncRNA function, but a huge number of evidences have suggested that lncRNAs represent an outstanding asset for cells. In particular, temporal and spatial expression of lncRNAs appears to be important for proper neurological functioning. Stunningly, abnormal lncRNA function has been found as being critical for the onset of neurological disorders. This chapter focus on the lncRNAs with a role in diseases affecting the central nervous system with particular regard for the lncRNAs causing those neurodegenerative diseases that exhibit dementia and/or motor dysfunctions. A specific section will be dedicated to the human neuronal lncRNAs that have been modelled in Drosophila. Finally, even if only few examples have been reported so far, an overview of the Drosophila lncRNAs with neurological functions will be also included in this chapter.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 23%
Researcher 5 19%
Student > Bachelor 5 19%
Student > Master 3 12%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 5 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 35%
Neuroscience 3 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Other 5 19%
Unknown 5 19%
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 29 June 2018.
All research outputs
#19,015,492
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#3,405
of 5,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#333,752
of 444,928 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#155
of 237 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 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 5,040 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 444,928 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 237 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.