↓ Skip to main content

Systemic LPS resulted in a transient hippocampus malfunction but a prolonged corpus callosum injury

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Anesthesiology, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
Systemic LPS resulted in a transient hippocampus malfunction but a prolonged corpus callosum injury
Published in
BMC Anesthesiology, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12871-017-0396-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jie Zhang, Aiyuan Li, Zongbin Song

Abstract

To investigate the effect of systemic lipopolysaccharide (LPS) on function of hippocampus and corpus callosum (CC) in adult rats. Adult rats with mature white matter tract were divided into systemic LPS and saline injection groups. Animal were euthanized following 3 daily injections (day 3) and 3-day after cessation of injections (day 6). At both time points, hippocampal long term potentiation (LTP) and CC compound action potentials (CAP) were recorded, beta amyloid precursor protein (β-APP) level in CC tissue was measured by Western blot, and microglia activation was examined by immunostaining and proportional area analysis. Systemic LPS significantly decreased amplitude of both post tetanic potentiation (PTP) and LTP at day 3, but PTP and LTP turned to be normal at day 6. CAP was significantly declined at day 3 but was further declined at day 6. The β-APP levels in CC tissues of LPS injected rats were significantly higher than that of saline group at both time-points. Interestingly, proportional area measurement disclosed that microglial areas in both hippocampus and CC significantly expanded at day3, but at the day 6, microglial area decreased in hippocampus but further increased in CC. Systemic LPS resulted in a transient hippocampus malfunction but a prolonged CC injury. Microglia activation may correlate with such LPS induced white matter injury.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 14%
Student > Master 2 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 7%
Professor 1 7%
Other 5 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 29%
Neuroscience 3 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Unknown 1 7%
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 21 August 2017.
All research outputs
#20,444,703
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from BMC Anesthesiology
#1,189
of 1,508 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#277,274
of 317,683 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Anesthesiology
#42
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 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 1,508 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. 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 317,683 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 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.