↓ Skip to main content

The role of the epithelial Na+ channel (ENaC) in high AVP but low aldosterone states

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
20 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
The role of the epithelial Na+ channel (ENaC) in high AVP but low aldosterone states
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2012.00304
Pubmed ID
Authors

James D. Stockand

Abstract

Due to the abundance of seminal discoveries establishing a strong causal relation between changes in aldosterone signaling, the activity of the epithelial Na(+) channel (ENaC) and blood pressure, the role of ENaC in health and disease is understood almost exclusively through the concept that this channel functions (in the distal nephron) as a key end-effector controlling renal sodium excretion during feedback regulation of blood pressure by the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS). Recent findings of aldosterone-independent stimulation of ENaC by vasopressin challenge the completeness of dogmatic understanding where ENaC serves solely as an end-effector of the RAAS important for control of sodium balance. Rather the consequences of activating ENaC in the distal nephron appear to depend on whether the channel is activated in the absence (by aldosterone) or presence [by vasopressin (AVP)] of simultaneous activation of aquaporin 2 water channels. Thus, a unifying paradigm has ENaC at the junction of two signaling systems that sometimes must compete: one controlling and responding to changes in sodium balance, perceived as mean arterial pressure, and the other water balance, perceived as plasma osmolality.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 5%
United States 1 5%
China 1 5%
Unknown 17 85%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 30%
Professor 3 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 60%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 10%
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 31 July 2012.
All research outputs
#20,322,106
of 22,865,319 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#9,411
of 13,656 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,774
of 244,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#210
of 309 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,865,319 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,656 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 244,669 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 309 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.