| Title |
Rules of tissue packing involving different cell types: human muscle organization
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/srep40444 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniel Sánchez-Gutiérrez, Aurora Sáez, Pedro Gómez-Gálvez, Carmen Paradas, Luis M. Escudero |
| Abstract |
Natural packed tissues are assembled as tessellations of polygonal cells. These include skeletal muscles and epithelial sheets. Skeletal muscles appear as a mosaic composed of two different types of cells: the "slow" and "fast" fibres. Their relative distribution is important for the muscle function but little is known about how the fibre arrangement is established and maintained. In this work we capture the organizational pattern in two different healthy muscles: biceps brachii and quadriceps. Here we show that the biceps brachii muscle presents a particular arrangement, based on the different sizes of slow and fast fibres. By contrast, in the quadriceps muscle an unbiased distribution exists. Our results indicate that the relative size of each cellular type imposes an intrinsic organization into natural tessellations. These findings establish a new framework for the analysis of any packed tissue where two or more cell types exist. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 10 | 48% |
| United States | 4 | 19% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 14% |
| Australia | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 3 | 14% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 12 | 57% |
| Scientists | 9 | 43% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 32 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 19% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 6 | 19% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 16% |
| Unknown | 4 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 25% |
| Computer Science | 4 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 9% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 8 | 25% |
| Unknown | 5 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 08 August 2017.
All research outputs
#3,055,635
of 24,625,114 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#25,877
of 134,367 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,901
of 431,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#787
of 3,829 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,625,114 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 134,367 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 431,079 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,829 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.