↓ Skip to main content

Selection of a suitable reference gene for quantitative gene expression in mouse lymph nodes after vaccination

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 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
Selection of a suitable reference gene for quantitative gene expression in mouse lymph nodes after vaccination
Published in
BMC Research Notes, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13104-017-3005-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yung-Yi C. Mosley, Harm HogenEsch

Abstract

The quantification of gene expression is an important tool in the evaluation of the immune response to vaccines. Reliable reference genes for gene expression studies in mouse draining lymph nodes after vaccination have not been reported. The utility of seven potential reference genes was investigated using commercially available Taq-man primer/probe mixes. Results were evaluated with RefFinder, a web-based program including multiple algorithm methods such as geNorm, NormFinder, BestKeeper and the comparative delta-Ct. Further assessment was done by applying the candidate reference genes in relative expression calculations with genes related to the magnitude and longevity of the humoral immune responses. The ubiquitin C gene, Ubc, was found to be the most reliable reference gene when validated with well-known genes that are expressed at relatively low levels after vaccination. The optimal time of sample collection varied depending on the function of the target genes. This study identified Ubc as the most reliable reference gene and provides useful information for studies examining immunological gene expression in the draining lymph nodes after vaccination in mice.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 17%
Student > Master 3 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 17%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 11%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 2 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 28%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 11%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 3 17%

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 13 December 2017.
All research outputs
#9,423,207
of 12,292,436 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,749
of 2,731 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#225,184
of 344,918 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#149
of 303 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,292,436 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,731 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 344,918 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 303 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.