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 |
Reduction of mutant huntingtin accumulation and toxicity by lysosomal cathepsins D and B in neurons
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Molecular Neurodegeneration, June 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1750-1326-6-37 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Qiuli Liang, Xiaosen Ouyang, Lonnie Schneider, Jianhua Zhang |
| Abstract |
Huntington's disease is caused by aggregation of mutant huntingtin (mHtt) protein containing more than a 36 polyQ repeat. Upregulation of macroautophagy was suggested as a neuroprotective strategy to degrade mutant huntingtin. However, macroautophagy initiation has been shown to be highly efficient in neurons whereas lysosomal activities are rate limiting. The role of the lysosomal and other proteases in Huntington is not clear. Some studies suggest that certain protease activities may contribute to toxicity whereas others are consistent with protection. These discrepancies may be due to a number of mechanisms including distinct effects of the specific intermediate digestion products of mutant huntingtin generated by different proteases. These observations suggested a critical need to investigate the consequence of upregulation of individual lysosomal enzyme in mutant huntingtin accumulation and toxicity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 4% |
| Austria | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 43 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Unknown | 6 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 37% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 7% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 4% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Unknown | 6 | 13% |
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 03 October 2012.
All research outputs
#15,251,976
of 22,679,690 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Neurodegeneration
#713
of 843 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#82,485
of 111,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Neurodegeneration
#6
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,679,690 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 843 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 111,204 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.