↓ Skip to main content

Genetic Toxicology

Overview of attention for book
Cover of 'Genetic Toxicology'

Table of Contents

  1. Altmetric Badge
    Book Overview
  2. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 1 The Application of Structure–Activity Relationships to the Prediction of the Mutagenic Activity of Chemicals
  3. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 2 Bacterial Mutagenicity Assays: Test Methods
  4. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 3 The Mouse Lymphoma Assay
  5. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 4 Mammalian Cell HPRT Gene Mutation Assay: Test Methods
  6. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 5 The In Vitro Mammalian Chromosome Aberration Test
  7. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 6 The Interpretation and Analysis of Cytogenetic Data
  8. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 7 The In Vitro Micronucleus Assay
  9. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 8 The In Vitro and In Vivo Comet Assays
  10. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 9 Assessment of DNA Interstrand Crosslinks Using the Modified Alkaline Comet Assay
  11. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 10 (32)P-postlabelling for the Sensitive Detection of DNA Adducts.
  12. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 11 Methods for the Detection of DNA Adducts
  13. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 12 The GADD45a-GFP GreenScreen HC Assay.
  14. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 13 Real-Time Reverse-Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction: Technical Considerations for Gene Expression Analysis
  15. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 14 Cytogenetic In Vivo Assays in Somatic Cells
  16. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 15 Cytogenetic Methods in Human Biomonitoring: Principles and Uses
  17. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 16 The Measurement of Induced Genetic Change in Mammalian Germ Cells
  18. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 17 Transgenic Animal Mutation Models: A Review of the Models and How They Function
  19. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 18 Analysis of Genotoxicity Data in a Regulatory Context
Attention for Chapter 12: The GADD45a-GFP GreenScreen HC Assay.
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
7 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
The GADD45a-GFP GreenScreen HC Assay.
Chapter number 12
Book title
Genetic Toxicology
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, December 2011
DOI 10.1007/978-1-61779-421-6_12
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-61779-420-9, 978-1-61779-421-6
Authors

Walmsley RM, Tate M, Walmsley, Richard M., Tate, Matthew, Richard M. Walmsley, Matthew Tate

Abstract

Mutagens, clastogens, and aneugens cause increased expression of the human GADD45a gene. This has been exploited in the GreenScreen HC genotoxicity assay in which the gene's expression is linked to the expression of green fluorescent protein (GFP). The host for the reporter construct is the human lymphoblastoid cell line TK6. It was chosen for its growth as a cell suspension, which allows simple pipette transfers, and for its wild-type p53 competent status. P53 is required for proper GADD45a expression, and more generally for genome stability. TK6 is a karyotypically stable cell line.The GreenScreen assays were designed to facilitate screening, and this is reflected in its microplate format and low compound requirement. Protocols are available for testing with and without S9 as a source of exogenous metabolic activation. Data is collected either spectrophotometrically or by flow cytometry, and a simple spreadsheet converts raw data into dose-response curves, and provides a statistically significant positive or negative result. Extensive validation has demonstrated that in contrast to other in vitro mammalian genotoxicity assays, the GADD45a assays have both high sensitivity and specificity - they very rarely produce misleading positive results.

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 7 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 14%
Unknown 6 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 43%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 14%
Student > Master 1 14%
Unknown 2 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 29%
Engineering 2 29%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 14%
Unknown 2 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 25 April 2019.
All research outputs
#6,909,831
of 22,659,164 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#2,071
of 13,019 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,162
of 240,213 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#123
of 466 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,659,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,019 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 240,213 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 466 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 72% of its contemporaries.