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 |
Comparative in vitro toxicity of a graphene oxide-silver nanocomposite and the pristine counterparts toward macrophages
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Nanobiotechnology, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12951-016-0165-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luis Augusto Visani de Luna, Ana Carolina Mazarin de Moraes, Sílvio Roberto Consonni, Catarinie Diniz Pereira, Solange Cadore, Selma Giorgio, Oswaldo Luiz Alves |
| Abstract |
Graphene oxide (GO) is a highly oxidized graphene form with oxygen functional groups on its surface. GO is an excellent platform to support and stabilize silver nanoparticles (AgNP), which gives rise to the graphene oxide-silver nanoparticle (GOAg) nanocomposite. Understanding how this nanocomposite interacts with cells is a toxicological challenge of great importance for future biomedical applications, and macrophage cells can provide information concerning the biocompatibility of these nanomaterials. The cytotoxicity of the GOAg nanocomposite, pristine GO, and pristine AgNP was compared toward two representative murine macrophages: a tumoral lineage (J774) and peritoneal macrophages collected from Balb/c mouse. The production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) by J774 macrophages was also monitored. We investigated the internalization of nanomaterials by transmission electron microscopy (TEM). The quantification of internalized silver was carried out by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). Nanomaterial stability in the cell media was investigated overtime by visual observation, inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry (ICP OES), and dynamic light scattering (DLS). The GOAg nanocomposite was more toxic than pristine GO and pristine AgNP for both macrophages, and it significantly induced more ROS production compared to pristine AgNP. TEM analysis showed that GOAg was internalized by tumoral J774 macrophages. However, macrophages internalized approximately 60 % less GOAg than did pristine AgNP. The images also showed the degradation of nanocomposite inside cells. Although the GOAg nanocomposite was less internalized by the macrophage cells, it was more toxic than the pristine counterparts and induced remarkable oxidative stress. Our findings strongly reveal a synergistic toxicity effect of the GOAg nanocomposite. The toxicity and fate of nanocomposites in cells are some of the major concerns in the development of novel biocompatible materials and must be carefully evaluated. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 109 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 15% |
| Researcher | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 20 | 18% |
| Unknown | 32 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 14 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 11% |
| Materials Science | 8 | 7% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 6% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 15% |
| Unknown | 46 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 January 2023.
All research outputs
#15,029,106
of 25,163,238 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nanobiotechnology
#516
of 1,873 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,528
of 304,930 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nanobiotechnology
#6
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,163,238 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,873 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% 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 304,930 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.