↓ Skip to main content

A new scenario of hypothalamic organization: rationale of new hypotheses introduced in the updated prosomeric model

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
177 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
126 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
A new scenario of hypothalamic organization: rationale of new hypotheses introduced in the updated prosomeric model
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, March 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnana.2015.00027
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luis Puelles, John L. R. Rubenstein

Abstract

In this essay, we aim to explore in depth the new concept of the hypothalamus that was presented in the updated prosomeric model (Puelles et al., 2012b; Allen Developing Mouse Brain Atlas). Initial sections deal with the antecedents of prosomeric ideas represented by the extensive literature centered on the alternative columnar model of Herrick (1910), Kuhlenbeck (1973) and Swanson (1992, 2003); a detailed critique explores why the columnar model is not helpful in the search for causal developmental explanations. In contrast, the emerging prosomeric scenario visibly includes many possibilities to propose causal explanations of hypothalamic structure relative to both anteroposterior and dorsoventral patterning mechanisms, and insures the possibility to compare hypothalamic histogenesis with that of more caudal parts of the brain. Next the four major changes introduced in the organization of the hypothalamus on occasion of the updated model are presented, and our rationale for these changes is explored in detail. It is hoped that this example of morphological theoretical analysis may be useful for readers interested in brain models, or in understanding why models may need to change in the quest for higher consistency.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 124 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 25%
Researcher 22 17%
Student > Master 10 8%
Student > Bachelor 9 7%
Professor 9 7%
Other 21 17%
Unknown 23 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 33 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 33 26%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 16 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 5%
Computer Science 2 2%
Other 6 5%
Unknown 30 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 25 December 2023.
All research outputs
#7,227,065
of 25,054,308 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#428
of 1,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,954
of 269,457 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#10
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,054,308 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,245 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 269,457 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 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 66% of its contemporaries.