↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Effect of selenium nanoparticles with different sizes in primary cultured intestinal epithelial cells of crucian carp, Carassius auratus gibelio

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nanomedicine, October 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
76 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
Effect of selenium nanoparticles with different sizes in primary cultured intestinal epithelial cells of crucian carp, Carassius auratus gibelio
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, October 2013
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s43691
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yanbo Wang, Xuxia Yan, Linglin Fu

Abstract

Nano-selenium (Se), with its high bioavailability and low toxicity, has attracted wide attention for its potential application in the prevention of oxidative damage in animal tissues. However, the effect of nano-Se of different sizes on the intestinal epithelial cells of the crucian carp (Carassius auratus gibelio) is poorly understood. Our study showed that different sizes and doses of nano-Se have varied effects on the cellular protein contents and the enzyme activities of secreted lactate dehydrogenase, intracellular sodium potassium adenosine triphosphatase, glutathione peroxidase, and superoxide dismutase. It was also indicated that nano-Se had a size-dependent effect on the primary intestinal epithelial cells of the crucian carp. Thus, these findings may bring us a step closer to understanding the size effect and the bioavailability of nano-Se on the intestinal tract of the crucian carp.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 26%
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Master 5 13%
Lecturer 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 5 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Engineering 3 8%
Environmental Science 3 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Other 10 26%
Unknown 7 18%
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 18 October 2013.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#3,127
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,050
of 219,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#84
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 219,840 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.