↓ Skip to main content

Toxicity of nano- and ionic silver to embryonic stem cells: a comparative toxicogenomic study

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Nanobiotechnology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 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
Toxicity of nano- and ionic silver to embryonic stem cells: a comparative toxicogenomic study
Published in
Journal of Nanobiotechnology, April 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12951-017-0265-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiugong Gao, Vanessa D. Topping, Zachary Keltner, Robert L. Sprando, Jeffrey J. Yourick

Abstract

The widespread application of silver nanoparticles (AgNPs) and silver-containing products has raised public safety concerns about their adverse effects on human health and the environment. To date, in vitro toxic effects of AgNPs and ionic silver (Ag(+)) on many somatic cell types are well established. However, no studies have been conducted hitherto to evaluate their effect on cellular transcriptome in embryonic stem cells (ESCs). The present study characterized transcriptomic changes induced by 5.0 µg/ml AgNPs during spontaneous differentiation of mouse ESCs, and compared them to those induced by Ag(+) under identical conditions. After 24 h exposure, 101 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) were identified in AgNP-treated cells, whereas 400 genes responded to Ag(+). Despite the large differences in the numbers of DEGs, functional annotation and pathway analysis of the regulated genes revealed overall similarities between AgNPs and Ag(+). In both cases, most of the functions and pathways impacted fell into two major categories, embryonic development and metabolism. Nevertheless, a number of canonical pathways related to cancer were found for Ag(+) but not for AgNPs. Conversely, it was noted that several members of the heat shock protein and the metallothionein families were upregulated by AgNPs but not Ag(+), suggesting specific oxidative stress effect of AgNPs in ESCs. The effects of AgNPs on oxidative stress and downstream apoptosis were subsequently confirmed by flow cytometry analysis. Taken together, the results presented in the current study demonstrate that both AgNPs and Ag(+) caused transcriptomic changes that could potentially exert an adverse effect on development. Although transcriptomic responses to AgNPs and Ag(+) were substantially similar, AgNPs exerted specific effects on ESCs due to their nanosized particulate form.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 21%
Student > Bachelor 6 18%
Student > Master 5 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 4 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 12%
Chemistry 4 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Other 7 21%
Unknown 7 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 25 April 2017.
All research outputs
#3,974,544
of 22,963,381 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nanobiotechnology
#122
of 1,429 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#70,970
of 310,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nanobiotechnology
#1
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,963,381 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,429 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 310,118 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.