↓ Skip to main content

Control of intestinal bacterial proliferation in regulation of lifespan in Caenorhabditis elegans

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Microbiology, March 2012
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 (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
143 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
233 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
Control of intestinal bacterial proliferation in regulation of lifespan in Caenorhabditis elegans
Published in
BMC Microbiology, March 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2180-12-49
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cynthia Portal-Celhay, Ellen R Bradley, Martin J Blaser

Abstract

A powerful approach to understanding complex processes such as aging is to use model organisms amenable to genetic manipulation, and to seek relevant phenotypes to measure. Caenorhabditis elegans is particularly suited to studies of aging, since numerous single-gene mutations have been identified that affect its lifespan; it possesses an innate immune system employing evolutionarily conserved signaling pathways affecting longevity. As worms age, bacteria accumulate in the intestinal tract. However, quantitative relationships between worm genotype, lifespan, and intestinal lumen bacterial load have not been examined. We hypothesized that gut immunity is less efficient in older animals, leading to enhanced bacterial accumulation, reducing longevity. To address this question, we evaluated the ability of worms to control bacterial accumulation as a functional marker of intestinal immunity.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 3%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 225 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 54 23%
Student > Bachelor 39 17%
Researcher 34 15%
Student > Master 30 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 4%
Other 27 12%
Unknown 39 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 80 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 64 27%
Immunology and Microbiology 12 5%
Chemistry 6 3%
Engineering 4 2%
Other 24 10%
Unknown 43 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 26 June 2012.
All research outputs
#3,113,013
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from BMC Microbiology
#237
of 3,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,944
of 172,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Microbiology
#2
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,489 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 172,511 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 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 91% of its contemporaries.