↓ Skip to main content

Dynamics of degeneration and regeneration in developing zebrafish peripheral axons reveals a requirement for extrinsic cell types

Overview of attention for article published in Neural Development, June 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
67 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 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
Dynamics of degeneration and regeneration in developing zebrafish peripheral axons reveals a requirement for extrinsic cell types
Published in
Neural Development, June 2012
DOI 10.1186/1749-8104-7-19
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rosario Villegas, Seanna M Martin, Kelley C O’Donnell, Simon A Carrillo, Alvaro Sagasti, Miguel L Allende

Abstract

Understanding the cellular mechanisms regulating axon degeneration and regeneration is crucial for developing treatments for nerve injury and neurodegenerative disease. In neurons, axon degeneration is distinct from cell body death and often precedes or is associated with the onset of disease symptoms. In the peripheral nervous system of both vertebrates and invertebrates, after degeneration of detached fragments, axons can often regenerate to restore function. Many studies of axonal degeneration and regeneration have used in vitro approaches, but the influence of extrinsic cell types on these processes can only be fully addressed in live animals. Because of its simplicity and superficial location, the larval zebrafish posterior lateral line (pLL) nerve is an ideal model system for live studies of axon degeneration and regeneration.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 104 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 28%
Researcher 20 19%
Student > Master 13 12%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 16 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 31%
Neuroscience 21 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 17 16%
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 21 June 2016.
All research outputs
#15,245,883
of 22,668,244 outputs
Outputs from Neural Development
#135
of 226 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,303
of 166,794 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neural Development
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,668,244 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 226 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 166,794 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.