↓ Skip to main content

Diverse Developmental Disorders from The One Ring: Distinct Molecular Pathways Underlie the Cohesinopathies

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
peer_reviews
1 peer review site

Citations

dimensions_citation
85 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
119 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
Diverse Developmental Disorders from The One Ring: Distinct Molecular Pathways Underlie the Cohesinopathies
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2012.00171
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julia A. Horsfield, Cristin G. Print, Maren Mönnich

Abstract

The multi-subunit protein complex, cohesin, is responsible for sister chromatid cohesion during cell division. The interaction of cohesin with DNA is controlled by a number of additional regulatory proteins. Mutations in cohesin, or its regulators, cause a spectrum of human developmental syndromes known as the "cohesinopathies." Cohesinopathy disorders include Cornelia de Lange Syndrome and Roberts Syndrome. The discovery of novel roles for chromatid cohesion proteins in regulating gene expression led to the idea that cohesinopathies are caused by dysregulation of multiple genes downstream of mutations in cohesion proteins. Consistent with this idea, Drosophila, mouse, and zebrafish cohesinopathy models all show altered expression of developmental genes. However, there appears to be incomplete overlap among dysregulated genes downstream of mutations in different components of the cohesion apparatus. This is surprising because mutations in all cohesion proteins would be predicted to affect cohesin's roles in cell division and gene expression in similar ways. Here we review the differences and similarities between genetic pathways downstream of components of the cohesion apparatus, and discuss how such differences might arise, and contribute to the spectrum of cohesinopathy disorders. We propose that mutations in different elements of the cohesion apparatus have distinct developmental outcomes that can be explained by sometimes subtly different molecular effects.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 119 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 118 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 26 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 18%
Researcher 13 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Professor 7 6%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 21 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 42 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 35 29%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 8%
Engineering 3 3%
Neuroscience 2 2%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 22 18%
Attention Score in Context

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 12 September 2012.
All research outputs
#14,733,275
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#4,430
of 11,737 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,240
of 244,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#133
of 255 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 11,737 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
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 244,101 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 255 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.