↓ Skip to main content

Ontogeny of Tissue-Resident Macrophages

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
253 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
509 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Ontogeny of Tissue-Resident Macrophages
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, September 2015
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00486
Pubmed ID
Authors

Guillaume Hoeffel, Florent Ginhoux

Abstract

The origin of tissue-resident macrophages, crucial for homeostasis and immunity, has remained controversial until recently. Originally described as part of the mononuclear phagocyte system, macrophages were long thought to derive solely from adult blood circulating monocytes. However, accumulating evidence now shows that certain macrophage populations are in fact independent from monocyte and even from adult bone marrow hematopoiesis. These tissue-resident macrophages derive from sequential seeding of tissues by two precursors during embryonic development. Primitive macrophages generated in the yolk sac (YS) from early erythro-myeloid progenitors (EMPs), independently of the transcription factor c-Myb and bypassing monocytic intermediates, first give rise to microglia. Later, fetal monocytes, generated from c-Myb(+) EMPs that initially seed the fetal liver (FL), then give rise to the majority of other adult macrophages. Thus, hematopoietic stem cell-independent embryonic precursors transiently present in the YS and the FL give rise to long-lasting self-renewing macrophage populations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 509 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 505 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 121 24%
Researcher 80 16%
Student > Bachelor 63 12%
Student > Master 53 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 34 7%
Other 59 12%
Unknown 99 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 96 19%
Immunology and Microbiology 96 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 79 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 55 11%
Neuroscience 44 9%
Other 39 8%
Unknown 100 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 04 April 2023.
All research outputs
#6,282,660
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#6,401
of 31,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,675
of 286,071 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#29
of 161 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 286,071 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.