↓ Skip to main content

A Population Dynamics Model for Clonal Diversity in a Germinal Center

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (62nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
A Population Dynamics Model for Clonal Diversity in a Germinal Center
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, September 2017
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2017.01693
Pubmed ID
Authors

Assaf Amitai, Luka Mesin, Gabriel D. Victora, Mehran Kardar, Arup K. Chakraborty

Abstract

Germinal centers (GCs) are micro-domains where B cells mature to develop high affinity antibodies. Inside a GC, B cells compete for antigen and T cell help, and the successful ones continue to evolve. New experimental results suggest that, under identical conditions, a wide spectrum of clonal diversity is observed in different GCs, and high affinity B cells are not always the ones selected. We use a birth, death and mutation model to study clonal competition in a GC over time. We find that, like all evolutionary processes, diversity loss is inherently stochastic. We study two selection mechanisms, birth-limited and death limited selection. While death limited selection maintains diversity and allows for slow clonal homogenization as affinity increases, birth limited selection results in more rapid takeover of successful clones. Finally, we qualitatively compare our model to experimental observations of clonal selection in mice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 75 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 37%
Researcher 13 17%
Student > Master 9 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 4%
Student > Bachelor 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 15 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 17 23%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 13%
Physics and Astronomy 9 12%
Chemical Engineering 3 4%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 20 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 05 October 2017.
All research outputs
#7,831,871
of 24,286,850 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#8,370
of 27,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#118,262
of 319,616 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#239
of 512 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,286,850 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 27,459 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 319,616 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 512 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 52% of its contemporaries.