The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Telomere Visualization in Tissue Sections using Pyrrole–Imidazole Polyamide Probes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1038/srep29261 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Asuka Sasaki, Satoru Ide, Yusuke Kawamoto, Toshikazu Bando, Yukinori Murata, Mari Shimura, Kazuhiko Yamada, Akiyoshi Hirata, Kiyoshi Nokihara, Tatsumi Hirata, Hiroshi Sugiyama, Kazuhiro Maeshima |
| Abstract |
Pyrrole-Imidazole (PI) polyamides bind to specific DNA sequences in the minor groove with high affinity. Specific DNA labeling by PI polyamides does not require DNA denaturation with harsh treatments of heat and formamide and has the advantages of rapid and less disruptive processing. Previously, we developed tandem hairpin PI polyamide probes (TH59 series), which label telomeres in cultured cell lines more efficiently than conventional methods, such as fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Here, we demonstrate that a TH59 derivative, HPTH59-b, along with immunostaining for specifying cell types in the tissues, visualizes telomeres in mouse and human tissue sections. Quantitative measurements of telomere length with single-cell resolution suggested shorter telomeres in the proliferating cell fractions of tumor than in non-tumor tissues. Thus, PI polyamides are a promising alternative for telomere labeling in clinical research, as well as in cell biology. |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 46 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 13% |
| Professor | 5 | 11% |
| Researcher | 5 | 11% |
| Other | 9 | 20% |
| Unknown | 5 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 24% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 22% |
| Chemistry | 9 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 6 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 September 2016.
All research outputs
#3,289,744
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#28,508
of 123,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,060
of 355,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#833
of 3,670 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 123,665 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 355,490 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,670 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.