↓ Skip to main content

Restoration versus reconstruction: cellular mechanisms of skin, nerve and muscle regeneration compared

Overview of attention for article published in Regenerative Medicine Research, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Restoration versus reconstruction: cellular mechanisms of skin, nerve and muscle regeneration compared
Published in
Regenerative Medicine Research, October 2013
DOI 10.1186/2050-490x-1-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dario Coletti, Laura Teodori, Zhenlin Lin, Jean Francois Beranudin, Sergio Adamo

Abstract

In tissues characterized by a high turnover or following acute injury, regeneration replaces damaged cells and is involved in adaptation to external cues, leading to homeostasis of many tissues during adult life. An understanding of the mechanics underlying tissue regeneration is highly relevant to regenerative medicine-based interventions. In order to investigate the existence a leitmotif of tissue regeneration, we compared the cellular aspects of regeneration of skin, nerve and skeletal muscle, three organs characterized by different types of anatomical and functional organization. Epidermis is a stratified squamous epithelium that migrates from the edge of the wound on the underlying dermis to rebuild lost tissue. Peripheral neurons are elongated cells whose neurites are organized in bundles, within an endoneurium of connective tissue; they either die upon injury or undergo remodeling and axon regrowth. Skeletal muscle is characterized by elongated syncytial cells, i.e. muscle fibers, that can temporarily survive in broken pieces; satellite cells residing along the fibers form new fibers, which ultimately fuse with the old ones as well as with each other to restore the previous organization. Satellite cell asymmetrical division grants a reservoir of undifferentiated cells, while other stem cell populations of muscle and non-muscle origin participate in muscle renewal. Following damage, all the tissues analyzed here go through three phases: inflammation, regeneration and maturation. Another common feature is the occurrence of cellular de-differentiation and/or differentiation events, including gene transcription, which are typical of embryonic development. Nonetheless, various strategies are used by different tissues to replace their lost parts. The epidermis regenerates ex novo, whereas neurons restore their missing parts; muscle fibers use a mixed strategy, based on the regrowth of missing parts through reconstruction by means of newborn fibers. The choice of either strategy is influenced by the anatomical, physical and chemical features of the cells as well as by the extracellular matrix typical of a given tissue, which points to the existence of differential, evolutionary-based mechanisms for specific tissue regeneration. The shared, ordered sequence of steps that characterize the regeneration processes examined suggests it may be possible to model this extremely important phenomenon to reproduce multicellular organisms.

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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 57 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Researcher 6 10%
Other 6 10%
Other 13 22%
Unknown 11 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 12%
Sports and Recreations 5 8%
Engineering 5 8%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 12 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 12 February 2017.
All research outputs
#16,720,137
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Regenerative Medicine Research
#16
of 25 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,237
of 219,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Regenerative Medicine Research
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 25 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one scored the same or higher as 9 of them.
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 219,840 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.