↓ Skip to main content

Forced Running Endurance Is Influenced by Gene(s) on Mouse Chromosome 10

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
Forced Running Endurance Is Influenced by Gene(s) on Mouse Chromosome 10
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2017
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2017.00009
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mindaugas Kvedaras, Petras Minderis, Andrej Fokin, Aivaras Ratkevicius, Tomas Venckunas, Arimantas Lionikas

Abstract

Phenotypic diversity between laboratory mouse strains provides a model for studying the underlying genetic mechanisms. The A/J strain performs poorly in various endurance exercise models. The aim of the study was to test if endurance capacity and contractility of the fast- and slow-twitch muscles are affected by the genes on mouse chromosome 10. The C57BL/6J (B6) strain and C57BL/6J-Chr 10(A/J)/NaJ (B6.A10) consomic strain which carries the A/J chromosome 10 on a B6 strain background were compared. The B6.A10 mice compared to B6 were larger in body weight (p < 0.02): 27.2 ± 1.9 vs. 23.8 ± 2.7 and 23.4 ± 1.9 vs. 22.9 ± 2.3 g, for males and females, respectively, and in male soleus weight (p < 0.02): 9.7 ± 0.4 vs. 8.6 ± 0.9 mg. In the forced running test the B6.A10 mice completed only 64% of the B6 covered distance (p < 0.0001). However, there was no difference in voluntary wheel running (p = 0.6) or in fatigability of isolated soleus (p = 0.24) or extensor digitorum longus (EDL, p = 0.7) muscles. We conclude that chromosome 10 of the A/J strain contributes to reduced endurance performance. We also discuss physiological mechanisms and methodological aspects relevant to interpretation of these findings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 22%
Student > Bachelor 3 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 17%
Professor 1 6%
Lecturer 1 6%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 4 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Sports and Recreations 2 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 11%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 5 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 24 January 2017.
All research outputs
#13,453,957
of 22,947,506 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#4,573
of 13,711 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,347
of 419,040 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#96
of 230 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,947,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,711 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. 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 419,040 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 230 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 57% of its contemporaries.