↓ Skip to main content

Ktu/PF13 is required for cytoplasmic pre-assembly of axonemal dyneins

Overview of attention for article published in Nature, December 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
341 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
208 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
Ktu/PF13 is required for cytoplasmic pre-assembly of axonemal dyneins
Published in
Nature, December 2008
DOI 10.1038/nature07471
Pubmed ID
Authors

Heymut Omran, Daisuke Kobayashi, Heike Olbrich, Tatsuya Tsukahara, Niki T. Loges, Haruo Hagiwara, Qi Zhang, Gerard Leblond, Eileen O’Toole, Chikako Hara, Hideaki Mizuno, Hiroyuki Kawano, Manfred Fliegauf, Toshiki Yagi, Sumito Koshida, Atsushi Miyawaki, Hanswalter Zentgraf, Horst Seithe, Richard Reinhardt, Yoshinori Watanabe, Ritsu Kamiya, David R. Mitchell, Hiroyuki Takeda

Abstract

Cilia and flagella are highly conserved organelles that have diverse roles in cell motility and sensing extracellular signals. Motility defects in cilia and flagella often result in primary ciliary dyskinesia. However, the mechanisms underlying cilia formation and function, and in particular the cytoplasmic assembly of dyneins that power ciliary motility, are only poorly understood. Here we report a new gene, kintoun (ktu), involved in this cytoplasmic process. This gene was first identified in a medaka mutant, and found to be mutated in primary ciliary dyskinesia patients from two affected families as well as in the pf13 mutant of Chlamydomonas. In the absence of Ktu/PF13, both outer and inner dynein arms are missing or defective in the axoneme, leading to a loss of motility. Biochemical and immunohistochemical studies show that Ktu/PF13 is one of the long-sought proteins involved in pre-assembly of dynein arm complexes in the cytoplasm before intraflagellar transport loads them for the ciliary compartment.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 208 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 4 2%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 201 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 40 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 39 19%
Student > Bachelor 20 10%
Student > Master 19 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 7%
Other 46 22%
Unknown 29 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 79 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 54 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 13%
Engineering 4 2%
Neuroscience 3 1%
Other 8 4%
Unknown 33 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 14 July 2018.
All research outputs
#7,538,708
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#68,585
of 98,779 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,119
of 184,068 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#395
of 518 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 98,779 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 102.5. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% 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 184,068 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 518 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.