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.
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 |
Microglia Polarization with M1/M2 Phenotype Changes in rd1 Mouse Model of Retinal Degeneration
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnana.2017.00077 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tian Zhou, Zijing Huang, Xiaowei Sun, Xiaowei Zhu, Lingli Zhou, Mei Li, Bing Cheng, Xialin Liu, Chang He |
| Abstract |
Microglia activation is recognized as the hallmark of neuroinflammation. However, the activation profile and phenotype changes of microglia during the process of retinal degeneration are poorly understood. This study aimed to elucidate the time-spatial pattern of microglia distribution and characterize the polarized phenotype of activated microglia during retinal neuroinflammation and degeneration in rd1 (Pde6β(rd1/rd1)) mice, the classic model of inherited retinal degeneration. Retinae of rd1 mice at different postnatal days (P7, P14, P21, P28, P56, and P180) were prepared for further analysis. We found most CD11b(+) or IBA1(+) microglia expressed Ki-67 and CD68 in rd1 mice and these cells migrated toward the layer of degenerative photoreceptors at the rapid rods degeneration phase from P14 to P28. These microglia exhibited typical ameboid activated shape with round bodies and scarce dendrites, while at late phase at P180, they displayed resting ramified morphology with elongated dendrites. Flow cytometry revealed that the percentage of CD86(+)CD206(-) M1 microglia increased markedly in rd1 retinae, however, no significant change was observed in CD206(+)CD86(-) M2 microglia. Interestingly, CD86(+)CD206(+) microglia, an intermediate state between the two extremes of M1 and M2, increased markedly at the rapid rods degeneration phase. The immunofluorescence images revealed that microglia in rd1 mice highly expressed M1 markers including CD16/32, CD86, and CD40. In addition, increased expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines (TNF-α, IL-6, and CCL2) was observed in rd1 mice. Our findings unfolded a panorama for the first time that microglia conducted distinctive behaviors with the progression of retinal degeneration in rd1 mice. Microglia is activated and particularly polarized to a pro-inflammatory M1 phenotype at the rapid rods degenerative phase, suggesting that the involvement of M1 microglia in the retinal neuroinflammation and degeneration. Most microglia adopted an intermediate polarization "M1½" state in rd1, revealing that microglia orchestrated a complicated continuous spectrum in degenerative retina. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 260 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 260 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 43 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 36 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 32 | 12% |
| Researcher | 25 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 5% |
| Other | 34 | 13% |
| Unknown | 77 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 55 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 39 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 22 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 12 | 5% |
| Other | 24 | 9% |
| Unknown | 86 | 33% |
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 11 October 2017.
All research outputs
#15,478,452
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#795
of 1,167 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,077
of 315,613 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#20
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,167 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 315,613 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.