↓ Skip to main content

Enhancer RNAs

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 3: Enhancer RNAs
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 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
Enhancer RNAs
Chapter number 3
Book title
Enhancer RNAs
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, January 2017
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-4035-6_3
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-4033-2, 978-1-4939-4035-6
Authors

Shibayama, Youtaro, Fanucchi, Stephanie, Mhlanga, Musa M, Youtaro Shibayama, Stephanie Fanucchi, Musa M. Mhlanga Ph.D., Musa M. Mhlanga

Editors

Ulf Andersson Ørom

Abstract

Enhancers are principal regulators that allow spatiotemporal tissue-specific control of gene expression. While mounting evidence suggests that enhancer-derived long noncoding RNAs (long ncRNAs), including enhancer RNAs (eRNAs), are an important component of enhancer function, their expression has not been broadly analyzed at a single cell level via imaging techniques. This protocol describes a method to image eRNA in single cells by in situ hybridization followed by tyramide signal amplification (TSA). The procedure can be multiplexed to simultaneously visualize both eRNA and protein-coding transcript at the site of transcriptional elongation, thereby permitting analysis of dynamics between the two transcript species in single cells. Our approach is not limited to eRNAs, but can be implemented on other transcripts.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 26%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 13%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 13%
Other 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 4 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 9%
Neuroscience 2 9%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 4 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 11 October 2016.
All research outputs
#13,244,941
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#3,471
of 13,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,143
of 420,399 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#319
of 1,074 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,132 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 420,399 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,074 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.