↓ Skip to main content

Muscle Stem Cells

Overview of attention for book
Cover of 'Muscle Stem Cells'

Table of Contents

  1. Altmetric Badge
    Book Overview
  2. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 1 Muscle Stem Cells: A Model System for Adult Stem Cell Biology
  3. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 2 Isolation of Muscle Stem Cells from Mouse Skeletal Muscle
  4. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 3 Primary Mouse Myoblast Purification using Magnetic Cell Separation
  5. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 4 Isolation, Culture, and Immunostaining of Skeletal Muscle Myofibers from Wildtype and Nestin-GFP Mice as a Means to Analyze Satellite Cell
  6. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 5 Characterization of Drosophila Muscle Stem Cell-Like Adult Muscle Precursors
  7. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 6 Using Transgenic Zebrafish to Study Muscle Stem/Progenitor Cells
  8. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 7 Muscle Interstitial Cells: A Brief Field Guide to Non-satellite Cell Populations in Skeletal Muscle
  9. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 8 Isolation and Characterization of Vessel-Associated Stem/Progenitor Cells from Skeletal Muscle
  10. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 9 Fibro/Adipogenic Progenitors (FAPs): Isolation by FACS and Culture
  11. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 10 Single Cell Gene Expression Profiling of Skeletal Muscle-Derived Cells
  12. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 11 Engraftment of FACS Isolated Muscle Stem Cells into Injured Skeletal Muscle
  13. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 12 Transplantation of Skeletal Muscle Stem Cells
  14. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 13 Simultaneous Measurement of Mitochondrial and Glycolytic Activity in Quiescent Muscle Stem Cells
  15. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 14 Monitoring Autophagy in Muscle Stem Cells
  16. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 15 Mimicking Muscle Stem Cell Quiescence in Culture: Methods for Synchronization in Reversible Arrest
  17. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 16 Methods for Observing and Quantifying Muscle Satellite Cell Motility and Invasion In Vitro
  18. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 17 Effects of Macrophage Conditioned-Medium on Murine and Human Muscle Cells: Analysis of Proliferation, Differentiation, and Fusion
  19. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 18 Optimization of Satellite Cell Culture Through Biomaterials
  20. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 19 Systematic Identification of Genes Regulating Muscle Stem Cell Self-Renewal and Differentiation
  21. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 20 Bioinformatics for Novel Long Intergenic Noncoding RNA (lincRNA) Identification in Skeletal Muscle Cells
Attention for Chapter 11: Engraftment of FACS Isolated Muscle Stem Cells into Injured Skeletal Muscle
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
8 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
Engraftment of FACS Isolated Muscle Stem Cells into Injured Skeletal Muscle
Chapter number 11
Book title
Muscle Stem Cells
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-6771-1_11
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-6769-8, 978-1-4939-6771-1
Authors

Matthew Tierney, Alessandra Sacco

Editors

Eusebio Perdiguero, DDW Cornelison

Abstract

Skeletal muscle stem cell (MuSC) isolation and transplantation are invaluable tools to assess their capacity for self-renewal and tissue repair. Significant technical advances in recent years have led to the optimization of these approaches, improving our ability to assess MuSC regenerative potential. Here, we describe the procedures for Fluorescent Activated Cell Sorting (FACS)-based isolation of MuSC, their intramuscular transplantation, and analysis of their engraftment into host tissues.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 13%
Unknown 7 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 38%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 25%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 13%
Researcher 1 13%
Unknown 1 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 13%
Neuroscience 1 13%
Engineering 1 13%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 27 February 2018.
All research outputs
#14,222,893
of 21,181,573 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#4,619
of 11,953 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,766
of 276,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#4
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 21,181,573 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,953 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 276,359 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.