↓ Skip to main content

Induction of hibernation-like hypothermia by central activation of the A1 adenosine receptor in a non-hibernator, the rat

Overview of attention for article published in The Journal of Physiological Sciences, May 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 (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Induction of hibernation-like hypothermia by central activation of the A1 adenosine receptor in a non-hibernator, the rat
Published in
The Journal of Physiological Sciences, May 2017
DOI 10.1007/s12576-017-0543-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hiroki Shimaoka, Takayuki Kawaguchi, Kahori Morikawa, Yuuki Sano, Kiyotada Naitou, Hiroyuki Nakamori, Takahiko Shiina, Yasutake Shimizu

Abstract

Central adenosine A1-receptor (A1AR)-mediated signals play a role in the induction of hibernation. We determined whether activation of the central A1AR enables rats to maintain normal sinus rhythm even after their body temperature has decreased to less than 20 °C. Intracerebroventricular injection of an adenosine A1 agonist, N6-cyclohexyladenosine (CHA), followed by cooling decreased the body temperature of rats to less than 20 °C. Normal sinus rhythm was fundamentally maintained during the extreme hypothermia. In contrast, forced induction of hypothermia by cooling anesthetized rats caused cardiac arrest. Additional administration of pentobarbital to rats in which hypothermia was induced by CHA also caused cardiac arrest, suggesting that the operation of some beneficial mechanisms that are not activated under anesthesia may be essential to keep heart beat under the hypothermia. These results suggest that central A1AR-mediated signals in the absence of anesthetics would provide an appropriate condition for maintaining normal sinus rhythm during extreme hypothermia.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 23%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Lecturer 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 14 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Neuroscience 2 6%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 14 45%
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 October 2018.
All research outputs
#14,262,465
of 23,975,976 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Physiological Sciences
#118
of 321 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,027
of 313,127 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Physiological Sciences
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,975,976 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 321 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 313,127 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.