↓ Skip to main content

Antibody Labelling of Resilin in Energy Stores for Jumping in Plant Sucking Insects

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 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
Antibody Labelling of Resilin in Energy Stores for Jumping in Plant Sucking Insects
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0028456
Pubmed ID
Authors

Malcolm Burrows, Jolanta A. Borycz, Stephen R. Shaw, Christopher M. Elvin, Ian A. Meinertzhagen

Abstract

The rubbery protein resilin appears to form an integral part of the energy storage structures that enable many insects to jump by using a catapult mechanism. In plant sucking bugs that jump (Hemiptera, Auchenorrhyncha), the energy generated by the slow contractions of huge thoracic jumping muscles is stored by bending composite bow-shaped parts of the internal thoracic skeleton. Sudden recoil of these bows powers the rapid and simultaneous movements of both hind legs that in turn propel a jump. Until now, identification of resilin at these storage sites has depended exclusively upon characteristics that may not be specific: its fluorescence when illuminated with specific wavelengths of ultraviolet (UV) light and extinction of that fluorescence at low pH. To consolidate identification we have labelled the cuticular structures involved with an antibody raised against a product of the Drosophila CG15920 gene. This encodes pro-resilin, the first exon of which was expressed in E. coli and used to raise the antibody. We show that in frozen sections from two species, the antibody labels precisely those parts of the metathoracic energy stores that fluoresce under UV illumination. The presence of resilin in these insects is thus now further supported by a molecular criterion that is immunohistochemically specific.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Unknown 37 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 36%
Student > Master 6 15%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 5%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 56%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Engineering 3 8%
Materials Science 2 5%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 6 15%
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 08 December 2011.
All research outputs
#18,301,870
of 22,659,164 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#153,700
of 193,435 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,744
of 240,804 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,217
of 2,869 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,659,164 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 193,435 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 240,804 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,869 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.