↓ Skip to main content

How to explain exercise-induced phenotype from molecular data: rethink and reconstruction based on AMPK and mTOR signaling

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
Title
How to explain exercise-induced phenotype from molecular data: rethink and reconstruction based on AMPK and mTOR signaling
Published in
SpringerPlus, December 2013
DOI 10.1186/2193-1801-2-693
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhengtang Qi, Xiaofeng Zhai, Shuzhe Ding

Abstract

During endurance and resistance exercise training, AMPK and mTOR signaling were known as selective pathways implicating the differentiation of exercise-induced phenotype in skeletal muscle. Among the previous studies, however, the differences in exercise protocol, the individuality and the genetic heterogeneity within species make it difficult to reach a consistent conclusion in the roles of AMPK and mTOR signaling. In this review, we aim not to reanalyze the previous articles and present the research progress of AMPK and mTOR signaling in exercise, but to propose an abstract general hypothesis for exercise-induced phenotype. Generally, exercise- induced skeletal muscle phenotype is independent of one and a few genes, proteins and signaling pathways. Convergent adaptation will better summarize the specificity of skeletal muscle phenotype in response to a single mode of exercise. Backward adaptation will open a new concept to illustrate the process of exercise-induced adaptation, such as mitochondrial quality control and muscle mass homeostasis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users 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 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 4%
New Zealand 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 80 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 18%
Student > Bachelor 11 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 12%
Researcher 9 11%
Other 8 9%
Other 19 22%
Unknown 13 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 18%
Sports and Recreations 14 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Other 5 6%
Unknown 14 16%
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 15 August 2019.
All research outputs
#7,457,759
of 24,717,692 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#437
of 1,865 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,470
of 317,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#20
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,717,692 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,865 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 317,235 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 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 73% of its contemporaries.