| Title |
In vivo biodistribution and behavior of CdTe/ZnS quantum dots
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, March 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s121075 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yan Zhao, Yue Zhang, Gaofeng Qin, Jinjun Cheng, Wenhao Zeng, Shuchen Liu, Hui Kong, Xueqian Wang, Qingguo Wang, Huihua Qu |
| Abstract |
The unique features of quantum dots (QDs) make them desirable fluorescent tags for cell and developmental biology applications that require long-term, multitarget, and highly sensitive imaging. In this work, we imaged fluorescent cadmium telluride/zinc sulfide (CdTe/ZnS) QDs in organs, tissues, and cells, and analyzed the mechanism of their lymphatic uptake and cellular distribution. We observed that the fluorescent CdTe/ZnS QDs were internalized by lymph nodes in four cell lines from different tissue sources. We obtained the fluorescence intensity-QD concentrations curve by quantitative analysis. Our results demonstrate that cells containing QDs can complete mitosis normally and that distribution of QDs was uniform across cell types and involved the vesicular transport system, including the endoplasmic reticulum. This capacity for CdTe/ZnS QD targeting provides insights into the applicability and limitations of fluorescent QDs for imaging biological specimens. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 13% |
| Researcher | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 6 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Materials Science | 4 | 17% |
| Chemistry | 4 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Chemical Engineering | 2 | 8% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Unknown | 7 | 29% |
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 24 March 2017.
All research outputs
#19,951,180
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,971
of 4,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#238,052
of 324,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#63
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,122 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 324,443 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.