↓ Skip to main content

Prenatal iron deficiency and monoamine oxidase A (MAOA) polymorphisms: combined risk for later cognitive performance in rhesus monkeys

Overview of attention for article published in Genes & Nutrition, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
Prenatal iron deficiency and monoamine oxidase A (MAOA) polymorphisms: combined risk for later cognitive performance in rhesus monkeys
Published in
Genes & Nutrition, January 2014
DOI 10.1007/s12263-013-0381-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mari Golub, Casey Hogrefe

Abstract

Monoamine oxidase A (MAOA) gene polymorphisms resulting in high and low transcription rates are associated with individual differences in reward efficacy and response inhibition. Iron deficiency (ID) is the most frequent single-nutrient deficiency worldwide, and prenatal ID has recently been shown to carry a risk for lower mental development scores in infants. In this study, a potential interaction of MAOA genotype and prenatal ID was studied in young male rhesus monkeys. Cognitive tasks, including problem solving, responsiveness to reward and attention, were used to characterize the potential interaction of these two fetal risks. ID was induced by feeding rhesus monkey dams an iron-deficient (10 ppm, ID) or an iron-sufficient (100 ppm, IS) diet during gestation (n = 10/group). Subgroups of the ID and IS diet offspring had low-MAOA or high-MAOA transcription rate polymorphisms. ID combined with low-MAOA genotype showed distinctive effects on reward preference and problem solving while ID in hi-MAOA juveniles modified response inhibition. Given the incidence of ID and MAOA polymorphisms in humans, this interaction could be a significant determinant of cognitive performance.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 25%
Student > Master 6 25%
Student > Bachelor 4 17%
Other 3 13%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 2 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 5 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 13%
Social Sciences 3 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 8%
Other 5 21%
Unknown 1 4%
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 05 July 2014.
All research outputs
#20,232,430
of 22,758,248 outputs
Outputs from Genes & Nutrition
#349
of 388 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#264,312
of 304,836 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genes & Nutrition
#15
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,248 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 388 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. 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 304,836 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 17 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.