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 |
A critical reflection on the principles of peroxisome formation in yeast
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2014.00110 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marten Veenhuis, Ida J. van der Klei |
| Abstract |
We have evaluated the current knowledge on peroxisome proliferation in yeast. In wild-type cells, peroxisomes multiply predominantly by fission at conditions that require peroxisome function(s) for growth. In cells that lack peroxisomes, for instance in pex3 and pex19 mutants or in mutants that display inheritance defects, peroxisomes may form de novo. We propose a novel machinery for the de novo formation of peroxisomes in pex3 cells, in which new peroxisomes do not arise from the endoplasmic reticulum. This machinery is based on the recent observation that membrane vesicles are present in pex3 cells that display peroxisomal characteristics in that they contain specific peroxisomal membrane and matrix proteins. These structures are the source for newly formed peroxisomes upon reintroduction of Pex3. Furthermore, we critically evaluate the principles of sorting of other peroxisomal membrane proteins to their target organelle and the function of the endoplasmic reticulum therein. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 3% |
| Sweden | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 38 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 35% |
| Researcher | 11 | 28% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 1 | 3% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 48% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 16 | 40% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 1 | 3% |
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 27 May 2014.
All research outputs
#18,367,612
of 22,749,166 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#8,085
of 13,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,091
of 223,361 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#54
of 78 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,749,166 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 13,556 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.5. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 223,361 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 78 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.