↓ Skip to main content

Derivation of an endogenous small RNA from double-stranded Sox4 sense and natural antisense transcripts in the mouse brain

Overview of attention for article published in Genomics, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Derivation of an endogenous small RNA from double-stranded Sox4 sense and natural antisense transcripts in the mouse brain
Published in
Genomics, January 2016
DOI 10.1016/j.ygeno.2016.01.006
Pubmed ID
Authors

King-Hwa Ling, Peter J. Brautigan, Sarah Moore, Rachel Fraser, Pike-See Cheah, Joy M. Raison, Milena Babic, Young Kyung Lee, Tasman Daish, Deidre M. Mattiske, Jeffrey R. Mann, David L. Adelson, Paul Q. Thomas, Christopher N. Hahn, Hamish S. Scott

Abstract

Natural antisense transcripts (NATs) are involved in cellular development and regulatory processes. Multiple NATs at the Sox4 gene locus are spatiotemporally regulated throughout murine cerebral corticogenesis. In the study, we evaluated the potential functional role of Sox4 NATs at Sox4 gene locus. We demonstrated Sox4 sense and NATs formed dsRNA aggregates in the cytoplasm of brain cells. Over expression of Sox4 NATs in NIH/3T3 cells generally did not alter the level of Sox4 mRNA expression or protein translation. Upregulation of a Sox4 NAT known as Sox4ot1 led to the production of a novel small RNA, Sox4_sir3. Its biogenesis is Dicer1-dependent and has characteristics resemble piRNA. Expression of Sox4_sir3 was observed in the marginal and germinative zones of the developing and postnatal brains suggesting a potential role in regulating neurogenesis. We proposed that Sox4 sense-NATs serve as Dicer1-dependent templates to produce a novel endo-siRNA- or piRNA-like Sox4_sir3.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 4%
Malaysia 1 4%
Unknown 25 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 15%
Researcher 4 15%
Student > Postgraduate 4 15%
Other 2 7%
Professor 2 7%
Other 9 33%
Unknown 2 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 11%
Neuroscience 3 11%
Unspecified 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 4 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 24 April 2016.
All research outputs
#19,945,185
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Genomics
#5,275
of 5,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#281,113
of 403,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genomics
#15
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,922 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 403,263 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.