↓ Skip to main content

A self-avoidance mechanism in patterning of the urinary collecting duct tree

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Developmental Biology, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
A self-avoidance mechanism in patterning of the urinary collecting duct tree
Published in
BMC Developmental Biology, September 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12861-014-0035-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jamie A Davies, Peter Hohenstein, C-Hong Chang, Rachel Berry

Abstract

BackgroundGlandular organs require the development of a correctly patterned epithelial tree. These arise by iterative branching: early branches have a stereotyped anatomy, while subsequent branching is more flexible, branches spacing out to avoid entanglement. Previous studies have suggested different genetic programs are responsible for these two classes of branches.ResultsHere, working with the urinary collecting duct tree of mouse kidneys, we show that the transition from the initial, stereotyped, wide branching to narrower later branching is independent from previous branching events but depends instead on the proximity of other branch tips. A simple computer model suggests that a repelling molecule secreted by branches can in principle generate a well-spaced tree that switches automatically from wide initial branch angles to narrower subsequent ones, and that co-cultured trees would distort their normal shapes rather than colliding. We confirm this collision-avoidance experimentally using organ cultures, and identify BMP7 as the repelling molecule.ConclusionsWe propose that self-avoidance, an intrinsically error-correcting mechanism, may be an important patterning mechanism in collecting duct branching, operating along with already-known mesenchyme-derived paracrine factors.

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 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Unknown 28 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 33%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Other 2 7%
Professor 2 7%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 13%
Engineering 2 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 7%
Mathematics 2 7%
Other 4 13%
Unknown 6 20%
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 19 February 2015.
All research outputs
#3,915,797
of 22,792,160 outputs
Outputs from BMC Developmental Biology
#57
of 369 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,090
of 239,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Developmental Biology
#3
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,792,160 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 369 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 239,026 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 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.