↓ Skip to main content

Loss of hif-1 promotes resistance to the exogenous mitochondrial stressor ethidium bromide in Caenorhabditis elegans

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Molecular and Cell Biology, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
Loss of hif-1 promotes resistance to the exogenous mitochondrial stressor ethidium bromide in Caenorhabditis elegans
Published in
BMC Molecular and Cell Biology, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12860-016-0112-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Muntasir Kamal, Dayana R. D’Amora, Terrance J. Kubiseski

Abstract

Mitochondrial dysfunction is one of the leading causes of neurological disorders in humans. Mitochondrial perturbations lead to adaptive mechanisms that include HIF-1 stabilization, though the consequences of increased levels of HIF-1 following mitochondrial stress remain poorly understood. Using Caenorhabditis elegans, we show that a hif-1 loss-of-function mutation confers resistance towards the mitochondrial toxin ethidium bromide (EtBr) and suppresses EtBr-induced production of ROS. In mammals, the PD-related gene DJ-1 is known to act as a redox sensor to confer protection against antioxidants and mitochondrial inhibitors. A deletion mutant of the C. elegans homolog djr-1.1 also showed increased resistance to EtBr. Furthermore, our data implicates p38 MAP kinase as an indispensable factor for survival against mitochondrial stress in both hif-1 and djr-1.1 mutants. We propose that EtBr-induced HIF-1 activates pathways that are antagonistic in conferring protection against EtBr toxicity and that blocking HIF-1 activity may promote survival in cells with compromised mitochondrial function.

X Demographics

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 5%
Unknown 18 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 26%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 16%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Researcher 2 11%
Professor 1 5%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 3 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 42%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 26%
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 30 May 2017.
All research outputs
#19,942,887
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from BMC Molecular and Cell Biology
#896
of 1,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,605
of 330,885 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Molecular and Cell Biology
#8
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,233 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 330,885 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.