↓ Skip to main content

Myofilament Calcium Sensitivity: Role in Regulation of In vivo Cardiac Contraction and Relaxation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 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
Myofilament Calcium Sensitivity: Role in Regulation of In vivo Cardiac Contraction and Relaxation
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, December 2016
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2016.00562
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jae-Hoon Chung, Brandon J. Biesiadecki, Mark T. Ziolo, Jonathan P. Davis, Paul M. L. Janssen

Abstract

Myofilament calcium sensitivity is an often-used indicator of cardiac muscle function, often assessed in disease states such as hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) and dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). While assessment of calcium sensitivity provides important insights into the mechanical force-generating capability of a muscle at steady-state, the dynamic behavior of the muscle cannot be sufficiently assessed with a force-pCa curve alone. The equilibrium dissociation constant (Kd) of the force-pCa curve depends on the ratio of the apparent calcium association rate constant (kon) and apparent calcium dissociation rate constant (koff) of calcium on TnC and as a stand-alone parameter cannot provide an accurate description of the dynamic contraction and relaxation behavior without the additional quantification of kon or koff, or actually measuring dynamic twitch kinetic parameters in an intact muscle. In this review, we examine the effect of length, frequency, and beta-adrenergic stimulation on myofilament calcium sensitivity and dynamic contraction in the myocardium, the effect of membrane permeabilization/mechanical- or chemical skinning on calcium sensitivity, and the dynamic consequences of various myofilament protein mutations with potential implications in contractile and relaxation behavior.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 141 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 36 26%
Researcher 23 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 11%
Student > Bachelor 14 10%
Student > Master 13 9%
Other 13 9%
Unknown 26 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 29 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 14%
Engineering 12 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 5%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 38 27%
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 17 December 2016.
All research outputs
#22,756,649
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#10,495
of 15,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#361,825
of 421,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#153
of 215 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 15,622 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. 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 421,358 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 215 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.