↓ Skip to main content

Splenic Macrophage Subsets and Their Function during Blood-Borne Infections

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
141 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
249 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
Splenic Macrophage Subsets and Their Function during Blood-Borne Infections
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, September 2015
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00480
Pubmed ID
Authors

Henrique Borges da Silva, Raíssa Fonseca, Rosana Moreira Pereira, Alexandra dos Anjos Cassado, José Maria Álvarez, Maria Regina D’Império Lima

Abstract

The spleen is one of the major immunological sites for maintaining blood homeostasis. Previous studies showed that heterogeneous splenic macrophage populations contribute in complimentary ways to control blood-borne infections and induce effective immune responses. Marginal metallophilic macrophages (MMMΦs) and marginal zone macrophages (MZMΦs) are cells with great ability to internalize blood-borne pathogens such as virus or bacteria. Their localization adjacent to T- and B-cell-rich splenic areas favors the rapid contact between these macrophages and cells from adaptive immunity. Indeed, MMMΦs and MZMΦs are considered important bridges between innate and adaptive immunity. Although red pulp macrophages (RpMΦs) are mainly considered scavengers for senescent erythrocytes, several data indicate a role for RpMΦs in control of infections such as blood-stage malaria as well as in the induction of innate and adaptive immunity. Here, we review current data on how different macrophage subsets recognize and help eliminate blood-borne pathogens, and, in turn, how the inflammatory microenvironment in different phases of infection (acute, chronic, and after pathogen clearance) influences macrophage function and survival.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 249 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 247 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 56 22%
Student > Master 37 15%
Researcher 32 13%
Student > Bachelor 23 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 5%
Other 27 11%
Unknown 62 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 58 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 41 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 30 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 8 3%
Other 25 10%
Unknown 66 27%
Attention Score in Context

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 07 October 2015.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#24,747
of 31,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,517
of 285,984 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#124
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,520 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 285,984 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 161 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.