↓ Skip to main content

Neuronal Nitric Oxide Synthase in Neural Stem Cells Induces Neuronal Fate Commitment via the Inhibition of Histone Deacetylase 2

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
36 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
Neuronal Nitric Oxide Synthase in Neural Stem Cells Induces Neuronal Fate Commitment via the Inhibition of Histone Deacetylase 2
Published in
Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fncel.2017.00066
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xing Jin, Zhang-Feng Yu, Fang Chen, Guang-Xian Lu, Xin-Yuan Ding, Lin-Jun Xie, Jian-Tong Sun

Abstract

Active adult neurogenesis produces new functional neurons, which replace the lost ones and contribute to brain repair. Promoting neurogenesis may offer a therapeutic strategy for human diseases associated with neurodegeneration. Here, we report that endogenous neuronal nitric oxide synthase (nNOS) for neural stem cells (NSCs) or progenitors positively regulates neurogenesis. nNOS repression exhibits significantly decreased neuronal differentiation and nNOS upregulation promotes neurons production from NSCs. Using a quantitative approach, we show that instructive effect, that is instruction of NSCs to adopt a neuronal fate, contributes to the favorable effect of endogenous nNOS on neurogenesis. Furthermore, nNOS-mediated instruction of neuronal fate commitment is predominantly due to the reduction of histone deacetylase 2 (HDAC2) expression and enzymatic activity. Further investigation will be needed to test whether HDAC2 can serve as a new target for therapeutic intervention of neurodegenerative disorders.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 25%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Professor 2 6%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 6 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 9 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 7 19%
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 10 March 2017.
All research outputs
#18,536,772
of 22,958,253 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#3,268
of 4,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#235,120
of 307,998 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#78
of 105 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,958,253 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,259 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 307,998 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 105 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.