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 |
Reciprocal Regulation of Axonal Filopodia and Outgrowth during Neuromuscular Junction Development
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, September 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0044759 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pan P. Li, Jie J. Zhou, Min Meng, Raghavan Madhavan, H. Benjamin Peng |
| Abstract |
The assembly of the vertebrate neuromuscular junction (NMJ) is initiated when nerve and muscle first contact each other by filopodial processes which are thought to enable close interactions between the synaptic partners and facilitate synaptogenesis. We recently reported that embryonic Xenopus spinal neurons preferentially extended filopodia towards cocultured muscle cells and that basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) produced by muscle activated neuronal FGF receptor 1 (FGFR1) to induce filopodia and favor synaptogenesis. Intriguingly, in an earlier study we found that neurotrophins (NTs), a different set of target-derived factors that act through Trk receptor tyrosine kinases, promoted neuronal growth but hindered presynaptic differentiation and NMJ formation. Thus, here we investigated how bFGF- and NT-signals in neurons jointly elicit presynaptic changes during the earliest stages of NMJ development. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 17 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 33% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 28% |
| Unknown | 1 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 33% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 22% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 6% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 1 | 6% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 05 September 2012.
All research outputs
#14,733,275
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#122,915
of 193,568 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,426
of 169,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,708
of 4,380 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,568 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 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 169,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,380 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.