↓ Skip to main content

Mouse Oocyte Development

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 1: Growth In Vitro of Granulosa Cell–Oocyte Complexes of the Mouse
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
6 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
Growth In Vitro of Granulosa Cell–Oocyte Complexes of the Mouse
Chapter number 1
Book title
Mouse Oocyte Development
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-8603-3_1
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-8602-6, 978-1-4939-8603-3
Authors

Stephany El-Hayek, Qin Yang, Hugh J. Clarke, El-Hayek, Stephany, Yang, Qin, Clarke, Hugh J.

Abstract

Analysis of the mechanisms that drive the growth and meiotic maturation of the female germ cell, the oocyte, has been greatly facilitated by the development of conditions that support these processes in vitro. Easily identified signposts of oocyte differentiation enable the ability of specific culture conditions to recapitulate normal oocyte development to be robustly assayed. Here we describe a technique for deriving complexes consisting of an oocyte surrounded by somatic granulosa cells from follicles and growing these granulosa cell-oocyte complexes in vitro. Such culture systems are useful for uncovering the principles of germ cell development and for improving our ability to preserve human and animal fertility through assisted reproduction.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 6 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 1 17%
Professor 1 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 17%
Student > Postgraduate 1 17%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 50%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 33%
Unknown 1 17%
Attention Score in Context

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 02 July 2018.
All research outputs
#17,981,442
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#7,315
of 13,207 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#310,681
of 442,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#869
of 1,499 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,207 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 442,643 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,499 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.