↓ Skip to main content

PNAS

Article Metrics

Testing Turing’s theory of morphogenesis in chemical cells

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
95 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
163 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
Title
Testing Turing’s theory of morphogenesis in chemical cells
Published in
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, March 2014
DOI 10.1073/pnas.1322005111
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nathan Tompkins, Ning Li, Camille Girabawe, Michael Heymann, G. Bard Ermentrout, Irving R. Epstein, Seth Fraden

Abstract

Alan Turing, in "The Chemical Basis of Morphogenesis" [Turing AM (1952) Philos Trans R Soc Lond 237(641):37-72], described how, in circular arrays of identical biological cells, diffusion can interact with chemical reactions to generate up to six periodic spatiotemporal chemical structures. Turing proposed that one of these structures, a stationary pattern with a chemically determined wavelength, is responsible for differentiation. We quantitatively test Turing's ideas in a cellular chemical system consisting of an emulsion of aqueous droplets containing the Belousov-Zhabotinsky oscillatory chemical reactants, dispersed in oil, and demonstrate that reaction-diffusion processes lead to chemical differentiation, which drives physical morphogenesis in chemical cells. We observe five of the six structures predicted by Turing. In 2D hexagonal arrays, a seventh structure emerges, incompatible with Turing's original model, which we explain by modifying the theory to include heterogeneity.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 50 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 163 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 10 6%
United Kingdom 4 2%
Spain 2 1%
Argentina 2 1%
Japan 1 <1%
Lithuania 1 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
Luxembourg 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Other 2 1%
Unknown 138 85%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 25%
Researcher 40 25%
Professor 19 12%
Student > Master 18 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 7%
Other 35 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 46 28%
Physics and Astronomy 35 21%
Engineering 13 8%
Chemistry 12 7%
Unspecified 12 7%
Other 45 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 151. 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 04 October 2017.
All research outputs
#79,661
of 12,274,090 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#1,978
of 77,057 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,410
of 195,211 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#74
of 1,011 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,274,090 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 77,057 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 195,211 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,011 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.