↓ Skip to main content

Functional annotation of the T-cell immunoglobulin mucin family in birds

Overview of attention for article published in Immunology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 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
Functional annotation of the T-cell immunoglobulin mucin family in birds
Published in
Immunology, June 2016
DOI 10.1111/imm.12607
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tuanjun Hu, Zhiguang Wu, Lonneke Vervelde, Lisa Rothwell, David A. Hume, Pete Kaiser

Abstract

T cell immunoglobulin and mucin (TIM) family molecules are cell membrane proteins, preferentially expressed on various immune cells and implicated in recognition and clearance of apoptotic cells. Little is known of their function outside human and mouse, and nothing outside mammals. We identified only two TIM genes (chTIM) in the chicken genome, putative orthologues of mammalian TIM1 and TIM4, and cloned the respective cDNAs. Like mammalian TIM1, chTIM1 expression was restricted to lymphoid tissues and immune cells. ChTIM4 encodes at least five splice variants with distinct expression profiles that also varied between strains of chicken. ChTIM4 expression was detected in myeloid antigen-presenting cells (APC), and in γδ T cells, whereas mammalian TIM4 is not expressed in T cells. Like the mammalian proteins, chTIM1 and chTIM4 fusion proteins bound to phosphatidylserine (PS), and are thereby implicated in recognition of apoptotic cells. The chTIM4-Ig fusion protein also had costimulatory activity on chicken T cells, suggesting a function in antigen presentation. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 33%
Professor 1 11%
Student > Bachelor 1 11%
Student > Master 1 11%
Other 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 33%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 11%
Neuroscience 1 11%
Unknown 3 33%

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 25 August 2017.
All research outputs
#3,428,216
of 12,348,212 outputs
Outputs from Immunology
#568
of 1,817 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,187
of 280,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Immunology
#12
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,348,212 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,817 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
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 280,245 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.