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 |
Fluorescent Tobacco mosaic virus-Derived Bio-Nanoparticles for Intravital Two-Photon Imaging
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Plant Science, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpls.2015.01244 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Annette Niehl, Florence Appaix, Sonia Boscá, Boudewijn van der Sanden, Jean-François Nicoud, Frédéric Bolze, Manfred Heinlein |
| Abstract |
Multi-photon intravital imaging has become a powerful tool to investigate the healthy and diseased brain vasculature in living animals. Although agents for multi-photon fluorescence microscopy of the microvasculature are available, issues related to stability, bioavailability, toxicity, cost or chemical adaptability remain to be solved. In particular, there is a need for highly fluorescent dyes linked to particles that do not cross the blood brain barrier (BBB) in brain diseases like tumor or stroke to estimate the functional blood supply. Plant virus particles possess a number of distinct advantages over other particles, the most important being the multi-valency of chemically addressable sites on the particle surface. This multi-valency, together with biological compatibility and inert nature, makes plant viruses ideal carriers for in vivo imaging agents. Here, we show that the well-known Tobacco mosaic virus is a suitable nanocarrier for two-photon dyes and for intravital imaging of the mouse brain vasculature. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 40 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 20% |
| Researcher | 6 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 25% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 13% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 11 | 28% |
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 22 February 2016.
All research outputs
#17,780,575
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#12,030
of 20,160 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,881
of 395,522 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#229
of 466 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,160 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. 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 395,522 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 466 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.