↓ Skip to main content

High-Throughput Screening Assays in Toxicology

Overview of attention for book
Cover of 'High-Throughput Screening Assays in Toxicology'

Table of Contents

  1. Altmetric Badge
    Book Overview
  2. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 1 Monitoring Ligand-Activated Protein–Protein Interactions Using Bioluminescent Resonance Energy Transfer (BRET) Assay
  3. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 2 Mitochondrial Membrane Potential Assay
  4. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 3 High-Throughput Screening Assays in Toxicology
  5. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 4 Quantitative High-Throughput Luciferase Screening in Identifying CAR Modulators
  6. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 5 Transactivation and Coactivator Recruitment Assays for Measuring Farnesoid X Receptor Activity
  7. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 6 Cell-Based Assay for Identifying the Modulators of Antioxidant Response Element Signaling Pathway
  8. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 7 Study Liver Cytochrome P450 3A4 Inhibition and Hepatotoxicity Using DMSO-Differentiated HuH-7 Cells
  9. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 8 Determination of Histone H2AX Phosphorylation in DT40 Cells
  10. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 9 High-Throughput and High-Content Micronucleus Assay in CHO-K1 Cells
  11. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 10 High-Throughput Screening Assays in Toxicology
  12. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 11 High-Throughput Screening Assays in Toxicology
  13. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 12 A Quantitative High-Throughput Screening Data Analysis Pipeline for Activity Profiling
  14. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 13 Correction of Microplate Data from High-Throughput Screening
  15. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 14 CurveP Method for Rendering High-Throughput Screening Dose-Response Data into Digital Fingerprints
  16. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 15 Accounting Artifacts in High-Throughput Toxicity Assays
  17. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 16 Accessing the High-Throughput Screening Data Landscape
  18. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 17 Curating and Preparing High-Throughput Screening Data for Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship Modeling
Attention for Chapter 11: High-Throughput Screening Assays in Toxicology
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 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.
Chapter title
High-Throughput Screening Assays in Toxicology
Chapter number 11
Book title
High-Throughput Screening Assays in Toxicology
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-6346-1_11
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-6344-7, 978-1-4939-6346-1
Authors

Lundby, Zachary, Camacho, Jessica, Allard, Patrick, Zachary Lundby, Jessica Camacho, Patrick Allard

Abstract

Germ cells are unique in their ability to transfer traits and genetic information from one generation to the next. The proper development and integrity of their genome are therefore of utmost importance for the health of organisms and survival of species. Many features of mammalian germ cells, including their long development span and difficulty of access, present challenges for their study in the context of toxicity assays. In light of these barriers, the model system Caenorhabditis elegans shows great potential given its ease of manipulation and genetic tractability which can be easily adapted for high-throughput analysis. In this chapter, we discuss the advantages of examining germ cell processes in C. elegans, and describe three functional germline assays for the examination of chemical impact on germline maintenance and function including assays probing germ cell differentiation, germline apoptosis, and germline epigenetic regulation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 44%
Other 1 11%
Professor 1 11%
Student > Bachelor 1 11%
Student > Master 1 11%
Other 1 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 44%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 22%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 11%
Environmental Science 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 03 January 2018.
All research outputs
#7,116,021
of 25,918,061 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#2,141
of 14,434 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,616
of 402,013 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#230
of 1,467 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,918,061 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,434 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 402,013 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 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,467 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.