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 |
Coxiella burnetii lipopolysaccharide blocks p38α-MAPK activation through the disruption of TLR-2 and TLR-4 association
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fcimb.2014.00182 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Filippo Conti, Nicolas Boucherit, Veronica Baldassarre, Virginie Trouplin, Rudolf Toman, Giovanna Mottola, Jean-Louis Mege, Eric Ghigo |
| Abstract |
To survive in macrophages, Coxiella burnetii hijacks the activation pathway of macrophages. Recently, we have demonstrated that C. burnetii, via its lipopolysaccharide (LPS), avoids the activation of p38α-MAPK through an antagonistic engagement of Toll-like receptor (TLR)-4. We investigated the fine-tuned mechanism leading to the absence of activation of the p38α-MAPK despite TLR-4 engagement. In macrophages challenged with LPS from the avirulent variants of C. burnetii, TLR-4 and TLR-2 co-immunoprecipitated. This association was absent in cells challenged by the LPS of pathogenic C. burnetii. The disruption makes TLRs unable to signal during the recognition of the LPS of pathogenic C. burnetii. The disruption of TLR-2 and TLR-4 was induced by the re-organization of the macrophage cytoskeleton by C. burnetii LPS. Interestingly, blocking the actin cytoskeleton re-organization relieved the disruption of the association TLR-2/TLR-4 by pathogenic C. burnetii and rescued the p38α-MAPK activation by C. burnetii. We elucidated an unexpected mechanism allowing pathogenic C. burnetii to avoid macrophage activation by the disruption of the TLR-2 and TLR-4 association. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 22% |
| Researcher | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 19% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 41% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 16% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 16% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 7 | 22% |
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 11 March 2023.
All research outputs
#20,290,478
of 25,800,372 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
#4,944
of 8,275 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,848
of 361,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
#18
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,800,372 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,275 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 361,229 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 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.