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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A Versatile Method for Cell-Specific Profiling of Translated mRNAs in Drosophila
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0040276 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Amanda Thomas, Pei-Jung Lee, Justin E. Dalton, Krystle J. Nomie, Loredana Stoica, Mauro Costa-Mattioli, Peter Chang, Sergey Nuzhdin, Michelle N. Arbeitman, Herman A. Dierick |
| Abstract |
In Drosophila melanogaster few methods exist to perform rapid cell-type or tissue-specific expression profiling. A translating ribosome affinity purification (TRAP) method to profile actively translated mRNAs has been developed for use in a number of multicellular organisms although it has only been implemented to examine limited sets of cell- or tissue-types in these organisms. We have adapted the TRAP method for use in the versatile GAL4/UAS system of Drosophila allowing profiling of almost any tissue/cell-type with a single genetic cross. We created transgenic strains expressing a GFP-tagged ribosomal protein, RpL10A, under the control of the UAS promoter to perform cell-type specific translatome profiling. The GFP::RpL10A fusion protein incorporates efficiently into ribosomes and polysomes. Polysome affinity purification strongly enriches mRNAs from expected genes in the targeted tissues with sufficient sensitivity to analyze expression in small cell populations. This method can be used to determine the unique translatome profiles in different cell-types under varied physiological, pharmacological and pathological conditions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chile | 1 | 20% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 244 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 1% |
| Japan | 2 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 231 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 59 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 58 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 17 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 5% |
| Other | 36 | 15% |
| Unknown | 37 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 120 | 49% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 49 | 20% |
| Neuroscience | 28 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 2% |
| Mathematics | 3 | 1% |
| Other | 7 | 3% |
| Unknown | 33 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 August 2020.
All research outputs
#12,856,791
of 22,669,724 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#100,087
of 193,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#87,922
of 164,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,926
of 3,977 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,669,724 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,515 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 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 164,297 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,977 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 50% of its contemporaries.