↓ Skip to main content

Acute Exposure to Crystalline Silica Reduces Macrophage Activation in Response to Bacterial Lipoproteins

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Acute Exposure to Crystalline Silica Reduces Macrophage Activation in Response to Bacterial Lipoproteins
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, February 2016
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2016.00049
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gillian L. Beamer, Benjamin P. Seaver, Forrest Jessop, David M. Shepherd, Celine A. Beamer

Abstract

Numerous studies have examined the relationship between alveolar macrophages (AMs) and crystalline silica (SiO2) using in vitro and in vivo immunotoxicity models; however, exactly how exposure to SiO2 alters the functionality of AM and the potential consequences for immunity to respiratory pathogens remains largely unknown. Because recognition and clearance of inhaled particulates and microbes are largely mediated by pattern recognition receptors (PRRs) on the surface of AM, we hypothesized that exposure to SiO2 limits the ability of AM to respond to bacterial challenge by altering PRR expression. Alveolar and bone marrow-derived macrophages downregulate TLR2 expression following acute SiO2 exposure (e.g., 4 h). Interestingly, these responses were dependent on interactions between SiO2 and the class A scavenger receptor CD204, but not MARCO. Furthermore, SiO2 exposure decreased uptake of fluorescently labeled Pam2CSK4 and Pam3CSK4, resulting in reduced secretion of IL-1β, but not IL-6. Collectively, our data suggest that SiO2 exposure alters AM phenotype, which in turn affects their ability to uptake and respond to bacterial lipoproteins.

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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 3%
Unknown 32 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 27%
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 9 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 11 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 9 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 15 February 2018.
All research outputs
#20,674,485
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#24,770
of 31,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#306,254
of 412,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#112
of 146 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 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 31,554 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 412,736 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 146 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.