↓ Skip to main content

Characterization of functional mannose receptor in a continuous hybridoma cell line

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Immunology, September 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
1 patent

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
Characterization of functional mannose receptor in a continuous hybridoma cell line
Published in
BMC Immunology, September 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2172-13-51
Pubmed ID
Authors

David J Vigerust, Sherell Vick, Virginia L Shepherd

Abstract

The mannose receptor is the best described member of the type I transmembrane C-type lectins; however much remains unanswered about the biology of the receptor. One difficulty has been the inability to consistently express high levels of a functional full length mannose receptor cDNA in mammalian cells. Another difficulty has been the lack of a human macrophage cell line expressing a fully functional receptor. Commonly used human macrophage cell lines such as U937, THP-1, Mono-Mac and HL60 do not express the mannose receptor. We have developed a macrophage hybridoma cell line (43MR cells) created by fusion of U937 cells with primary human monocyte-derived macrophages, resulting in a non-adherent cell line expressing several properties of primary macrophages. The purpose of this study was to identify and select mannose receptor-expressing cells using fluorescence-activated cell sorting and to characterize the expression and function of the receptor.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Argentina 1 2%
Unknown 65 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 24%
Student > Bachelor 10 15%
Researcher 10 15%
Student > Master 10 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 11 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 12 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 11%
Chemistry 4 6%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 13 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 July 2018.
All research outputs
#6,914,676
of 22,678,224 outputs
Outputs from BMC Immunology
#117
of 588 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,162
of 168,582 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Immunology
#5
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,678,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 588 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 168,582 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 68% of its contemporaries.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its contemporaries.