↓ Skip to main content

Calcium dysregulation links ALS defective proteins and motor neuron selective vulnerability

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
131 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
Calcium dysregulation links ALS defective proteins and motor neuron selective vulnerability
Published in
Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, June 2015
DOI 10.3389/fncel.2015.00225
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sónia S. Leal, Cláudio M. Gomes

Abstract

More than 20 distinct gene loci have so far been implicated in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), a fatal neurodegenerative disorder characterized by progressive neurodegeneration of motor neurons (MN) and death. Most of this distinct set of ALS-related proteins undergoes toxic deposition specifically in MN for reasons which remain unclear. Here we overview a recent body of evidence indicative that mutations in ALS-related proteins can disrupt fundamental Ca(2+) signalling pathways in MN, and that Ca(2+) itself impacts both directly or indirectly in many ALS critical proteins and cellular processes that result in MN neurodegeneration. We argue that the inherent vulnerability of MN to dysregulation of intracellular Ca(2+) is deeply associated with discriminating pathogenicity and aberrant crosstalk of most of the critical proteins involved in ALS. Overall, Ca(2+) deregulation in MN is at the cornerstone of different ALS processes and is likely one of the factors contributing to the selective susceptibility of these cells to this particular neurodegenerative disease.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 130 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 23%
Student > Bachelor 23 18%
Student > Master 16 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 8%
Researcher 10 8%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 26 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 36 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 30 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 2%
Other 8 6%
Unknown 28 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 10 July 2015.
All research outputs
#2,818,288
of 22,807,037 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#543
of 4,241 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,359
of 239,980 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#17
of 118 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,807,037 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,241 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 239,980 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 118 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.