| Title |
Damage of photoreceptor-derived cells in culture induced by light emitting diode-derived blue light
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1038/srep05223 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yoshiki Kuse, Kenjiro Ogawa, Kazuhiro Tsuruma, Masamitsu Shimazawa, Hideaki Hara |
| Abstract |
Our eyes are increasingly exposed to light from the emitting diode (LED) light of video display terminals (VDT) which contain much blue light. VDTs are equipped with televisions, personal computers, and smart phones. The present study aims to clarify the mechanism underlying blue LED light-induced photoreceptor cell damage. Murine cone photoreceptor-derived cells (661 W) were exposed to blue, white, or green LED light (0.38 mW/cm(2)). In the present study, blue LED light increased reactive oxygen species (ROS) production, altered the protein expression level, induced the aggregation of short-wavelength opsins (S-opsin), resulting in severe cell damage. While, blue LED light damaged the primary retinal cells and the damage was photoreceptor specific. N-Acetylcysteine (NAC), an antioxidant, protected against the cellular damage induced by blue LED light. Overall, the LED light induced cell damage was wavelength-, but not energy-dependent and may cause more severe retinal photoreceptor cell damage than the other LED light. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 97 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 16 | 16% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 5% |
| United States | 5 | 5% |
| Malaysia | 3 | 3% |
| Czechia | 2 | 2% |
| France | 2 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Austria | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Unknown | 57 | 59% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 79 | 81% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 10 | 10% |
| Scientists | 5 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 266 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 3 | 1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 260 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 48 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 45 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 31 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 22 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 5% |
| Other | 35 | 13% |
| Unknown | 71 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 40 | 15% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 33 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 31 | 12% |
| Neuroscience | 16 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 16 | 6% |
| Other | 48 | 18% |
| Unknown | 82 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 86. 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 02 January 2024.
All research outputs
#506,024
of 25,779,988 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#5,602
of 142,987 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,309
of 244,240 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#19
of 847 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,779,988 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 142,987 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 244,240 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 847 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 97% of its contemporaries.