↓ Skip to main content

A Fat-Facets-Dscam1-JNK Pathway Enhances Axonal Growth in Development and after Injury

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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 Fat-Facets-Dscam1-JNK Pathway Enhances Axonal Growth in Development and after Injury
Published in
Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fncel.2017.00416
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marta Koch, Maya Nicolas, Marlen Zschaetzsch, Natalie de Geest, Annelies Claeys, Jiekun Yan, Matthew J. Morgan, Maria-Luise Erfurth, Matthew Holt, Dietmar Schmucker, Bassem A. Hassan

Abstract

Injury to the adult central nervous systems (CNS) can result in severe long-term disability because damaged CNS connections fail to regenerate after trauma. Identification of regulators that enhance the intrinsic growth capacity of severed axons is a first step to restore function. Here, we conducted a gain-of-function genetic screen in Drosophila to identify strong inducers of axonal growth after injury. We focus on a novel axis the Down Syndrome Cell Adhesion Molecule (Dscam1), the de-ubiquitinating enzyme Fat Facets (Faf)/Usp9x and the Jun N-Terminal Kinase (JNK) pathway transcription factor Kayak (Kay)/Fos. Genetic and biochemical analyses link these genes in a common signaling pathway whereby Faf stabilizes Dscam1 protein levels, by acting on the 3'-UTR of its mRNA, and Dscam1 acts upstream of the growth-promoting JNK signal. The mammalian homolog of Faf, Usp9x/FAM, shares both the regenerative and Dscam1 stabilizing activities, suggesting a conserved mechanism.

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 profiles of 8 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 33%
Student > Master 3 13%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Professor 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 6 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 29%
Neuroscience 6 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 18 April 2018.
All research outputs
#7,648,574
of 26,456,908 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#1,410
of 4,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,650
of 453,915 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#21
of 96 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,456,908 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,816 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 453,915 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 96 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.