↓ Skip to main content

Proteomic Analysis of Chicken Skeletal Muscle during Embryonic Development

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Proteomic Analysis of Chicken Skeletal Muscle during Embryonic Development
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, May 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2017.00281
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hongjia Ouyang, Zhijun Wang, Xiaolan Chen, Jiao Yu, Zhenhui Li, Qinghua Nie

Abstract

Embryonic growth and development of skeletal muscle is a major determinant of muscle mass, and has a significant effect on meat production in chicken. To assess the protein expression profiles during embryonic skeletal muscle development, we performed a proteomics analysis using isobaric tags for relative and absolute quantification (iTRAQ) in leg muscle tissues of female Xinghua chicken at embryonic age (E) 11, E16, and 1-day post hatch (D1). We identified 3,240 proteins in chicken embryonic muscle and 491 of them were differentially expressed (fold change ≥ 1.5 or ≤ 0.666 and p < 0.05). There were 19 up- and 32 down-regulated proteins in E11 vs. E16 group, 238 up- and 227 down-regulated proteins in E11 vs. D1 group, and 13 up- and 5 down-regulated proteins in E16 vs. D1 group. Protein interaction network analyses indicated that these differentially expressed proteins were mainly involved in the pathway of protein synthesis, muscle contraction, and oxidative phosphorylation. Integrative analysis of proteome and our previous transcriptome data found 189 differentially expressed proteins that correlated with their mRNA level. The interactions between these proteins were also involved in muscle contraction and oxidative phosphorylation pathways. The lncRNA-protein interaction network found four proteins DMD, MYL3, TNNI2, and TNNT3 that are all involved in muscle contraction and may be lncRNA regulated. These results provide several candidate genes for further investigation into the molecular mechanisms of chicken embryonic muscle development, and enable us to better understanding their regulation networks and biochemical pathways.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 24%
Researcher 5 17%
Student > Master 5 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Professor 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 6 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 21%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 8 28%
Unknown 5 17%
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 24 May 2017.
All research outputs
#18,547,867
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#8,188
of 13,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#236,643
of 310,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#159
of 254 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 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 13,720 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 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 310,577 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 254 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.