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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Negative Evidence for a Functional Role of Neuronal DNMT3a in Persistent Pain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnmol.2018.00332 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jessica Saunders, Zoe Hore, Clive Gentry, Stephen McMahon, Franziska Denk |
| Abstract |
Traditionally, neuroscience has had to rely on mixed tissue analysis to examine transcriptional and epigenetic changes in the context of nervous system function or pathology. However, particularly when studying chronic pain conditions, this approach can be flawed, since it neglects to take into account the shifting contribution of different cell types across experimental conditions. Here, we demonstrate this using the example of DNA methyltransferases (DNMTs) - a group of epigenetic modifiers consisting of Dnmt1, Dnmt3a, and Dnmt3b in mammalian cells. We used sensory neuron-specific knockout mice for Dnmt3a/3b as well as pharmacological blockade of Dnmt1 to study their role in nociception. In contrast to previous analyses on whole tissue, we find that Dnmt3a and 3b protein is not expressed in adult DRG neurons, that none of the DNA methyltransferases are regulated with injury and that interfering with their function has no effect on nociception. Our results therefore currently do not support a role for neuronal DNA methyltransferases in pain processing in adult animals. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
| Japan | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 16 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 25% |
| Researcher | 4 | 25% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 25% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 3 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 25% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 September 2018.
All research outputs
#14,425,183
of 23,103,436 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience
#1,554
of 2,931 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,453
of 337,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience
#76
of 135 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,436 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,931 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 337,668 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 135 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.