↓ Skip to main content

Filovirus Tropism: Cellular Molecules for Viral Entry

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
68 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
180 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
Filovirus Tropism: Cellular Molecules for Viral Entry
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2012.00034
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ayato Takada

Abstract

In human and non-human primates, filoviruses (Ebola and Marburg viruses) cause severe hemorrhagic fever. Recently, other animals such as pigs and some species of fruit bats have also been shown to be susceptible to these viruses. While having a preference for some cell types such as hepatocytes, endothelial cells, dendritic cells, monocytes, and macrophages, filoviruses are known to be pantropic in infection of primates. The envelope glycoprotein (GP) is responsible for both receptor binding and fusion of the virus envelope with the host cell membrane. It has been demonstrated that filovirus GP interacts with multiple molecules for entry into host cells, whereas none of the cellular molecules so far identified as a receptor/co-receptor fully explains filovirus tissue tropism and host range. Available data suggest that the mucin-like region (MLR) on GP plays an important role in attachment to the preferred target cells, whose infection is likely involved in filovirus pathogenesis, whereas the MLR is not essential for the fundamental function of the GP in viral entry into cells in vitro. Further studies elucidating the mechanisms of cellular entry of filoviruses may shed light on the development of strategies for prophylaxis and treatment of Ebola and Marburg hemorrhagic fevers.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 180 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 3%
United Kingdom 2 1%
Australia 1 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 169 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 39 22%
Researcher 30 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 13%
Student > Master 16 9%
Other 12 7%
Other 27 15%
Unknown 32 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 56 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 26 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 22 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 11%
Chemistry 4 2%
Other 21 12%
Unknown 32 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 22 August 2015.
All research outputs
#13,173,958
of 22,751,628 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#9,800
of 24,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,396
of 244,257 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#126
of 317 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,751,628 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,617 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 244,257 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 317 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its contemporaries.