↓ Skip to main content

Fibronectin contributes to notochord intercalation in the invertebrate chordate, Ciona intestinalis

Overview of attention for article published in EvoDevo, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Fibronectin contributes to notochord intercalation in the invertebrate chordate, Ciona intestinalis
Published in
EvoDevo, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13227-016-0056-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fernando Segade, Christina Cota, Amber Famiglietti, Anna Cha, Brad Davidson

Abstract

Genomic analysis has upended chordate phylogeny, placing the tunicates as the sister group to the vertebrates. This taxonomic rearrangement raises questions about the emergence of a tunicate/vertebrate ancestor. Characterization of developmental genes uniquely shared by tunicates and vertebrates is one promising approach for deciphering developmental shifts underlying acquisition of novel, ancestral traits. The matrix glycoprotein Fibronectin (FN) has long been considered a vertebrate-specific gene, playing a major instructive role in vertebrate embryonic development. However, the recent computational prediction of an orthologous "vertebrate-like" Fn gene in the genome of a tunicate, Ciona savignyi, challenges this viewpoint suggesting that Fn may have arisen in the shared tunicate/vertebrate ancestor. Here we verify the presence of a tunicate Fn ortholog. Transgenic reporter analysis was used to characterize a Ciona Fn enhancer driving expression in the notochord. Targeted knockdown in the notochord lineage indicates that FN is required for proper convergent extension. These findings suggest that acquisition of Fn was associated with altered notochord morphogenesis in the vertebrate/tunicate ancestor.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 27 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 31%
Researcher 6 21%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 7%
Student > Master 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 13 45%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 21%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 6 21%
Attention Score in Context

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 02 September 2016.
All research outputs
#20,338,537
of 22,884,315 outputs
Outputs from EvoDevo
#308
of 319 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#294,482
of 337,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EvoDevo
#9
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,884,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 319 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 337,459 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.