↓ Skip to main content

Clinical and subclinical endometritis induced alterations in bovine endometrial transcriptome and miRNome profile

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
71 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
90 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
Clinical and subclinical endometritis induced alterations in bovine endometrial transcriptome and miRNome profile
Published in
BMC Genomics, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12864-016-2513-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dessie Salilew-Wondim, Sally Ibrahim, Samuel Gebremedhn, Dawit Tesfaye, Maike Heppelmann, Heinrich Bollwein, Christiane Pfarrer, Ernst Tholen, Christiane Neuhoff, Karl Schellander, Michael Hoelker

Abstract

Clinical and subclinical endometritis are known to affect the fertility of dairy cows by inducing uterine inflammation. We hypothesized that clinical or subclinical endometritis could affect the fertility of cows by disturbing the molecular milieu of the uterine environment. Here we aimed to investigate the endometrial molecular signatures and pathways affected by clinical and subclinical endometritis. For this, Holstein Frisian cows at 42-60 days postpartum were classified as healthy (HE), subclinical endometritis (SE) or clinical endometritis (CE) based on veterinary clinical examination of the animals and histological evaluation the corresponding endometrial biopsies. Endometrial transcriptome and miRNome profile changes and associated molecular pathways induced by subclinical or clinical endometritis were then investigated using GeneChip® Bovine Genome Array and Exiqon microRNA PCR Human Panel arrays, respectively. The results were further validated in vitro using endometrial stromal and epithelial cells challenged with subclinical and clinical doses of lipopolysaccharide (LPS). Transcriptome profile analysis revealed altered expression level of 203 genes in CE compared to HE animals. Of these, 92 genes including PTHLH, INHBA, DAPL1 and SERPINA1 were significantly upregulated, whereas the expression level of 111 genes including MAOB, CXCR4, HSD11B and, BOLA, were significantly downregulated in CE compared to the HE animal group. However, in SE group, the expression patterns of only 28 genes were found to be significantly altered, of which 26 genes including PTHLH, INHBA, DAPL1, MAOB, CXCR4 and TGIF1 were common to the CE group. Gene annotation analysis indicated the immune system processes; G-protein coupled receptor signaling pathway and chemotaxis to be among the affected functions in endometritis animal groups. In addition, miRNA expression analysis indicated the dysregulation of 35 miRNAs including miR-608, miR-526b* and miR-1265 in CE animals and 102 miRNAs including let-7 family (let-7a, let-7c, let-7d, let-7d*, let-7e, let-7f, let-7i) in SE animals. Interestingly, 14 miRNAs including let-7e, miR-92b, miR-337-3p, let-7f and miR-145 were affected in both SE and CE animal groups. Further in vitro analysis of selected differentially expressed genes and miRNAs in endometrial stroma and epithelial cells challenged with SE and CE doses of LPS showed similar results to that of the array data generated using samples collected from SE and CE animals. The results of this study unraveled endometrial transcriptome and miRNome profile alterations in cows affected by subclinical or clinical endometritis which may have a significant effect on the uterine homeostasis and uterine receptivity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users 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 90 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 90 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 16 18%
Researcher 11 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 11%
Student > Bachelor 9 10%
Other 16 18%
Unknown 18 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 32%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 13 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 3%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 20 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 14 March 2016.
All research outputs
#7,476,657
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#3,604
of 10,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,541
of 300,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#78
of 216 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,660 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 300,113 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 216 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 62% of its contemporaries.