↓ Skip to main content

Fhf2 gene deletion causes temperature-sensitive cardiac conduction failure

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, October 2016
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 (87th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
Fhf2 gene deletion causes temperature-sensitive cardiac conduction failure
Published in
Nature Communications, October 2016
DOI 10.1038/ncomms12966
Pubmed ID
Authors

David S. Park, Akshay Shekhar, Christopher Marra, Xianming Lin, Carolina Vasquez, Sergio Solinas, Kevin Kelley, Gregory Morley, Mitchell Goldfarb, Glenn I. Fishman

Abstract

Fever is a highly conserved systemic response to infection dating back over 600 million years. Although conferring a survival benefit, fever can negatively impact the function of excitable tissues, such as the heart, producing cardiac arrhythmias. Here we show that mice lacking fibroblast growth factor homologous factor 2 (FHF2) have normal cardiac rhythm at baseline, but increasing core body temperature by as little as 3 °C causes coved-type ST elevations and progressive conduction failure that is fully reversible upon return to normothermia. FHF2-deficient cardiomyocytes generate action potentials upon current injection at 25 °C but are unexcitable at 40 °C. The absence of FHF2 accelerates the rate of closed-state and open-state sodium channel inactivation, which synergizes with temperature-dependent enhancement of inactivation rate to severely suppress cardiac sodium currents at elevated temperatures. Our experimental and computational results identify an essential role for FHF2 in dictating myocardial excitability and conduction that safeguards against temperature-sensitive conduction failure.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 3%
Spain 1 3%
Unknown 36 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Student > Master 5 13%
Researcher 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Professor 2 5%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 11 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 29%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 16%
Neuroscience 3 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Engineering 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 10 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 18 November 2020.
All research outputs
#2,098,307
of 22,890,496 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#24,383
of 47,156 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,645
of 319,862 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#461
of 903 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,890,496 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 47,156 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 55.8. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 319,862 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 903 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.