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 |
Low Concentrations of Caffeine and Its Analogs Extend the Lifespan of Caenorhabditis elegans by Modulating IGF-1-Like Pathway
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnagi.2018.00211 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xiaocui Du, Yun Guan, Qin Huang, Ming Lv, Xiaofang He, Liang Yan, Shuhei Hayashi, Chongye Fang, Xuanjun Wang, Jun Sheng |
| Abstract |
Caffeine has been reported to delay aging and protect aging-associated disorders in Caenorhabditis elegans. However, the effects of low concentration of caffeine and its analogs on lifespan are currently missing. Herein, we report that at much lower concentrations (as low as 10 μg/ml), caffeine extended the lifespan of C. elegans without affecting food intake and reproduction. The effect of caffeine was dependent on IGF-1-like pathway, although the insulin receptor homolog, daf-2 allele, e1371, was dispensable. Four caffeine analogs, 1-methylxanthine, 7-methylxanthine, 1,3-dimethylxanthine, and 1,7-dimethylxanthine, also extended lifespan, whereas 3-methylxanthine and 3,7-dimethylxanthine did not exhibit lifespan-extending activity. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 29% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 14% |
| South Africa | 1 | 14% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 29% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 24% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 11 | 52% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 14% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Psychology | 1 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 11 | 52% |
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 01 August 2018.
All research outputs
#7,039,440
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#2,582
of 4,871 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#120,112
of 326,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#62
of 97 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 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 4,871 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 326,758 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 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 97 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.