↓ Skip to main content

Mouse Oocyte Development

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 8: Immunofluorescence Technique to Detect Subcellular Structures Critical to Oocyte Maturation
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 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
Immunofluorescence Technique to Detect Subcellular Structures Critical to Oocyte Maturation
Chapter number 8
Book title
Mouse Oocyte Development
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-8603-3_8
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-8602-6, 978-1-4939-8603-3
Authors

Cecilia S. Blengini, Karen Schindler, Blengini, Cecilia S., Schindler, Karen

Abstract

Immunofluorescence is a useful technique for analysis of protein expression and localization, thereby providing information regarding protein function, regulation, and protein-protein interactions. It is a standard approach to determine the temporal and spatial location of gene products that function in oocyte meiotic maturation. Fixation is one of the critical steps in the immunofluorescence protocol. Here, we describe the use of antibodies that are widely utilized in oocytes studies: anti-centromeric antigen (ACA), anti-Aurora kinase A (AURKA) and anti-alpha and gamma-tubulin antibodies that require different technical approaches for successful visualization, and we provide protocols for these conditions that are amenable to mouse oocyte studies. Detection of these proteins provides phenotypic information about spindle morphology, chromosome alignment, and microtubule attachments to kinetochores critical to assessing oocyte quality.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 2 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 17%
Researcher 2 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 17%
Student > Postgraduate 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 58%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 17%
Environmental Science 1 8%
Unknown 2 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
#20,523,725
of 23,094,276 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#9,976
of 13,207 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#378,481
of 442,643 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#1,194
of 1,499 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,094,276 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.