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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The MDCK variety pack: choosing the right strain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Molecular and Cell Biology, October 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2121-12-43 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Joseph D Dukes, Paul Whitley, Andrew D Chalmers |
| Abstract |
The MDCK cell line provides a tractable model for studying protein trafficking, polarity and junctions (tight, adherens, desmosome and gap) in epithelial cells. However, there are many different strains of MDCK cells available, including the parental line, MDCK I, MDCK II, MDCK.1, MDCK.2, superdome and supertube, making it difficult for new researchers to decide which strain to use. Furthermore, there is often inadequate reporting of strain types and where cells were obtained from in the literature. This review aims to provide new researchers with a guide to the different MDCK strains and a directory of where they can be obtained. We also hope to encourage experienced researchers to report the stain and origin of their MDCK cells. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 29% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 29% |
| Austria | 1 | 14% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 14% |
| Unknown | 1 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 43% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 29% |
| Scientists | 2 | 29% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 406 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 3 | <1% |
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Nigeria | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 393 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 97 | 24% |
| Student > Bachelor | 59 | 15% |
| Researcher | 58 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 40 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 27 | 7% |
| Other | 35 | 9% |
| Unknown | 90 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 125 | 31% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 82 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 6% |
| Engineering | 19 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 15 | 4% |
| Other | 47 | 12% |
| Unknown | 95 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 27 May 2023.
All research outputs
#2,419,002
of 25,663,438 outputs
Outputs from BMC Molecular and Cell Biology
#26
of 1,239 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,179
of 148,756 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Molecular and Cell Biology
#2
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,663,438 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,239 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 148,756 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.