↓ Skip to main content

CaMKIIdelta subtypes: localization and function

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Pharmacology, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
69 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
CaMKIIdelta subtypes: localization and function
Published in
Frontiers in Pharmacology, January 2014
DOI 10.3389/fphar.2014.00015
Pubmed ID
Authors

Charles B. B. Gray, Joan Heller Brown

Abstract

In this review we discuss the localization and function of the known subtypes of calcium/calmodulin dependent protein kinase IIδ (CaMKIIδ) and their role in cardiac physiology and pathophysiology. The CaMKII holoenzyme is comprised of multiple subunits that are encoded by four different genes called CaMKIIα, β, γ, and δ. While these four genes have a high degree of sequence homology, they are expressed in different tissues. CaMKIIα and β are expressed in neuronal tissue while γ and δ are present throughout the body, including in the heart. Both CaMKIIγ and δ are alternatively spliced in the heart to generate multiple subtypes. CaMKIIδ is the predominant cardiac isoform and is alternatively spliced in the heart to generate the CaMKIIδB subtype or the slightly less abundant δC subtype. The CaMKIIδB mRNA sequence contains a 33bp insert not present in δC that codes for an 11-amino acid nuclear localization sequence. This review focuses on the localization and function of the CaMKIIδ subtypes δB and δC and the role of these subtypes in arrhythmias, contractile dysfunction, gene transcription, and the regulation of Ca(2+) handling.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
Unknown 66 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 22%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 12%
Student > Master 7 10%
Researcher 7 10%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 13 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 23 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 12%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 18 26%
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 11 February 2014.
All research outputs
#18,363,356
of 22,743,667 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#8,162
of 15,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#229,336
of 305,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Pharmacology
#25
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,743,667 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 15,994 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 305,223 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.