↓ Skip to main content

The Absence of Calponin 2 in Rabbits Suggests Caution in Choosing Animal Models

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, February 2020
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 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
The Absence of Calponin 2 in Rabbits Suggests Caution in Choosing Animal Models
Published in
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, February 2020
DOI 10.3389/fbioe.2020.00042
Pubmed ID
Authors

Olesya Plazyo, Weilong Hao, Jian-Ping Jin

Abstract

While the rapid development of CRISPR/CAS9 technology has allowed for readily performing site-specific genomic editing in non-rodent species, an emerging challenge is to select the most suitable species to generate animal models for the study of human biology and diseases. Improving CRISPR/CAS9 methodology for more effective and precise editing in the rabbit genome to replicate human disease is an active area of biomedical research. Although rabbits are more closely related to humans than mice (based on DNA sequence analysis), our whole-genome protein database search revealed that rabbits have more missing human protein sequences than mice. Hence, precisely replicating human diseases in rabbits requires further consideration, especially in studies involving essential functions of the missing proteins. For example, rabbits lack calponin 2, an actin-associated cytoskeletal protein that is important in the pathogenesis of inflammatory arthritis, atherosclerosis, and calcific aortic valve disease. The justification of using rabbits as models for human biomedical research is based on their larger size and their closer phylogenetic distance to humans (based on sequence similarity of conserved genes), but this may be misleading. Our findings, which consider whole-genome protein profiling together with actual protein expressions, serve as a warning to the scientific community to consider overall conservation as well as the conservation of specific proteins when choosing an animal model to study a particular aspect of human biology prior to investing in genetic engineering.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 7 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Unspecified 1 14%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 14%
Student > Bachelor 1 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 14%
Student > Master 1 14%
Other 1 14%
Unknown 1 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Unspecified 1 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 14%
Computer Science 1 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 14%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 January 2023.
All research outputs
#16,543,976
of 25,129,395 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#2,556
of 8,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,076
of 365,508 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#173
of 313 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,129,395 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,266 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 365,508 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 313 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.