↓ Skip to main content

Endogenous electric fields as guiding cue for cell migration

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
124 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
215 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
Endogenous electric fields as guiding cue for cell migration
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, May 2015
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2015.00143
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard H. W. Funk

Abstract

This review covers two topics: (1) "membrane potential of low magnitude and related electric fields (bioelectricity)" and (2) "cell migration under the guiding cue of electric fields (EF)."Membrane potentials for this "bioelectricity" arise from the segregation of charges by special molecular machines (pumps, transporters, ion channels) situated within the plasma membrane of each cell type (including eukaryotic non-neural animal cells). The arising patterns of ion gradients direct many cell- and molecular biological processes such as embryogenesis, wound healing, regeneration. Furthermore, EF are important as guiding cues for cell migration and are often overriding chemical or topographic cues. In osteoblasts, for instance, the directional information of EF is captured by charged transporters on the cell membrane and transferred into signaling mechanisms that modulate the cytoskeleton and motor proteins. This results in a persistent directional migration along an EF guiding cue. As an outlook, we discuss questions concerning the fluctuation of EF and the frequencies and mapping of the "electric" interior of the cell. Another exciting topic for further research is the modeling of field concepts for such distant, non-chemical cellular interactions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 215 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Taiwan 1 <1%
Unknown 211 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 49 23%
Researcher 33 15%
Student > Master 30 14%
Student > Bachelor 21 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 6%
Other 32 15%
Unknown 38 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 35 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 26 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 24 11%
Materials Science 24 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 7%
Other 35 16%
Unknown 56 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 July 2021.
All research outputs
#7,457,701
of 22,800,560 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#3,704
of 13,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,561
of 264,551 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#25
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,800,560 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,562 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
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 264,551 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.