| Title |
Scalable electrophysiology in intact small animals with nanoscale suspended electrode arrays
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Nanotechnology, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/nnano.2017.55 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniel L. Gonzales, Krishna N. Badhiwala, Daniel G. Vercosa, Benjamin W. Avants, Zheng Liu, Weiwei Zhong, Jacob T. Robinson |
| Abstract |
Electrical measurements from large populations of animals would help reveal fundamental properties of the nervous system and neurological diseases. Small invertebrates are ideal for these large-scale studies; however, patch-clamp electrophysiology in microscopic animals typically requires invasive dissections and is low-throughput. To overcome these limitations, we present nano-SPEARs: suspended electrodes integrated into a scalable microfluidic device. Using this technology, we have made the first extracellular recordings of body-wall muscle electrophysiology inside an intact roundworm, Caenorhabditis elegans. We can also use nano-SPEARs to record from multiple animals in parallel and even from other species, such as Hydra littoralis. Furthermore, we use nano-SPEARs to establish the first electrophysiological phenotypes for C. elegans models for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and Parkinson's disease, and show a partial rescue of the Parkinson's phenotype through drug treatment. These results demonstrate that nano-SPEARs provide the core technology for microchips that enable scalable, in vivo studies of neurobiology and neurological diseases. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 32 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 14 | 44% |
| Canada | 2 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | 6% |
| Costa Rica | 1 | 3% |
| Sweden | 1 | 3% |
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Thailand | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 23 | 72% |
| Scientists | 7 | 22% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 3% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 83 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 28% |
| Researcher | 18 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 13% |
| Unknown | 12 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 23 | 27% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 10% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 10% |
| Materials Science | 7 | 8% |
| Other | 16 | 19% |
| Unknown | 12 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 125. 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 21 July 2022.
All research outputs
#311,003
of 24,286,850 outputs
Outputs from Nature Nanotechnology
#250
of 3,602 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,746
of 313,908 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Nanotechnology
#11
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,286,850 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,602 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 37.5. 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 313,908 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.