↓ Skip to main content

Efficiency of Xist-mediated silencing on autosomes is linked to chromosomal domain organisation

Overview of attention for article published in Epigenetics & Chromatin, May 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
55 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
89 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
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
Efficiency of Xist-mediated silencing on autosomes is linked to chromosomal domain organisation
Published in
Epigenetics & Chromatin, May 2010
DOI 10.1186/1756-8935-3-10
Pubmed ID
Authors

Y Amy Tang, Derek Huntley, Giovanni Montana, Andrea Cerase, Tatyana B Nesterova, Neil Brockdorff

Abstract

X chromosome inactivation, the mechanism used by mammals to equalise dosage of X-linked genes in XX females relative to XY males, is triggered by chromosome-wide localisation of a cis-acting non-coding RNA, Xist. The mechanism of Xist RNA spreading and Xist-dependent silencing is poorly understood. A large body of evidence indicates that silencing is more efficient on the X chromosome than on autosomes, leading to the idea that the X chromosome has acquired sequences that facilitate propagation of silencing. LINE-1 (L1) repeats are relatively enriched on the X chromosome and have been proposed as candidates for these sequences. To determine the requirements for efficient silencing we have analysed the relationship of chromosome features, including L1 repeats, and the extent of silencing in cell lines carrying inducible Xist transgenes located on one of three different autosomes.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 89 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 31%
Researcher 16 18%
Student > Master 12 13%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Professor 5 6%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 6 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 44 49%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 27 30%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 1%
Other 3 3%
Unknown 8 9%

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 29 September 2010.
All research outputs
#7,825,134
of 12,470,444 outputs
Outputs from Epigenetics & Chromatin
#288
of 359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#116,098
of 219,369 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Epigenetics & Chromatin
#8
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,470,444 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 359 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 219,369 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.