↓ Skip to main content

Cold Shock Induced Protein RBM3 but Not Mild Hypothermia Protects Human SH-SY5Y Neuroblastoma Cells From MPP+-Induced Neurotoxicity

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
Cold Shock Induced Protein RBM3 but Not Mild Hypothermia Protects Human SH-SY5Y Neuroblastoma Cells From MPP+-Induced Neurotoxicity
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2018.00298
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hai-Jie Yang, Xiang Shi, Fei Ju, Bei-Ning Hao, Shuang-Ping Ma, Lei Wang, Bin-Feng Cheng, Mian Wang

Abstract

The cold shock protein RBM3 can mediate mild hypothermia-related protection in neurodegeneration such as Alzheimer's disease. However, it remains unclear whether RBM3 and mild hypothermia provide same protection in model of Parkinson's disease (PD), the second most common neurodegenerative disorder. In this study, human SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cells subjected to insult by 1-methyl-4-phenylpyridinium (MPP+) served as an in-vitro model of PD. Mild hypothermia (32°C) aggravated MPP+-induced apoptosis, which was boosted when RBM3 was silenced by siRNA. In contrast, overexpression of RBM3 significantly reduced this apoptosis. MPP+ treatment downregulated the expression of RBM3 both endogenously and exogenously and suppressed its induction by mild hypothermia (32°C). In conclusion, our data suggest that cold shock protein RBM3 provides neuroprotection in a cell model of PD, suggesting that RBM3 induction may be a suitable strategy for PD therapy. However, mild hypothermia exacerbates MPP+-induced apoptosis even that RBM3 could be synthesized during mild hypothermia.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 30 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 33%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Other 3 10%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 27%
Neuroscience 6 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Decision Sciences 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 7 23%
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 29 May 2022.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#8,070
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,138
of 338,967 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#195
of 244 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 338,967 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 244 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.