↓ Skip to main content

C. elegans

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 10: C. elegans
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
C. elegans
Chapter number 10
Book title
C. elegans
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, January 2015
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-2842-2_10
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-2841-5, 978-1-4939-2842-2
Authors

Manning, Laura, Richmond, Janet, Laura Manning, Janet Richmond

Abstract

While traditional chemical fixation methods for C. elegans electron microscopy (EM) have provided invaluable anatomical and structural information, the development of high-pressure freeze (HPF) and freeze substitution (FS) protocols offers advantages for high-resolution imaging. Specimens prepared using HPF methodology exhibit fewer distortion artifacts due to fixation and dehydration, have improved antigenicity, and result in a more physiologically accurate structural representation of the worm. In the HPF technique, freely moving worms are frozen at high-pressure (2100 bar) and low temperature (-180 °C) within milliseconds. These conditions prevent the formation of ice crystals that can damage cellular structures. Samples then undergo FS, during which worms are slowly brought to room temperature while substituting amorphous ice with organic solvents to preserve tissue in its near native state and provide contrast for imaging. FS can be performed in an automatic freeze substitution (AFS) machine or in makeshift, temperature controlled chambers. Fixed worms can be embedded in plastic resin and further processed for a variety of imaging techniques. Samples then viewed using scanning (SEM) or transmission electron microscopy (TEM) will show enhanced preservation of organelles, cell morphology, and antigenicity for immunocytochemistry.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 37%
Researcher 4 21%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Student > Master 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 3 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 32%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 26%
Neuroscience 1 5%
Materials Science 1 5%
Engineering 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 26%
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 01 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,335,423
of 22,880,230 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#9,918
of 13,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#296,064
of 353,344 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#636
of 997 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,230 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 13,132 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 353,344 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 997 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.