Are you a researcher?
Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
SCImago
Q2
WOS
Q2
Impact factor
3
SJR
0.751
CiteScore
5.8
Categories
Genetics
Cancer Research
Areas
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
Years of issue
2009-2025
journal names
Epigenomics
EPIGENOMICS-UK
Top-3 citing journals

Epigenomics
(1065 citations)

International Journal of Molecular Sciences
(992 citations)

Clinical Epigenetics
(645 citations)
Top-3 organizations

Harvard University
(64 publications)
Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico
(29 publications)

Nanjing Medical University
(27 publications)

Harvard University
(22 publications)

Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences
(15 publications)
Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico
(14 publications)
Top-3 countries
Most cited in 5 years
Found
Publications found: 12371
Q2

Determination of KGa‐1b and SHCa‐1 Δ′17O and δ18O via Laser Fluorination of Lithium Fluoride Clay Pellets
Gagnon C., Havel R., Chen J., Piccione G., Ibarra D.
ABSTRACTRationaleStable oxygen isotope measurements in silicate clays, such as smectite and kaolinite, provide crucial information for understanding Earth's climate history and environmental changes. Despite a growing interest in the oxygen isotope analysis of silicate clays and clay‐rich sediments, there lacks a consensus on the preparation and standardization of clay mineral samples. To improve the accuracy and interlaboratory comparisons of clay isotope measurements, especially those involving laser fluorination techniques, newly established kaolinite and smectite oxygen isotope standards are much needed.MethodsWe employed conventional nickel bomb fluorination combined with dual‐inlet isotope ratio mass spectrometry to establish precise δ18O and Δ′17O values for leached clay reference materials KGa‐1b and SHCa‐1, a kaolinite and a hectorite/smectite, respectively. We further measured leached KGa‐1b and SHCa‐1 pressed into pellets with a lithium fluoride as a binding agent for the laser fluorination method, allowing us to test the reproducibility between methods and utilize a standard laser chamber drift correction scheme.ResultsThe laser fluorination technique yielded highly precise and reproducible δ18O and Δ′17O measurements for the KGa‐1b and SHCa‐1, aligning with bomb values of δ18O. This confirms the method's reliability and comparability to conventional isotope measurement techniques while also stressing the importance of proper sample preparation and laser chamber drift corrections.ConclusionsThis study demonstrates that laser fluorination is an effective method for accurately measuring the stable oxygen isotope composition of silicate clays or clay‐rich sediments when corrected with known silicate clay standards. These methods offer a valuable methodology for future research and applications that will significantly improve our understanding of past climate and environmental conditions.
Q2

Rapid Proteomic Amelogenin Sex Estimation of Human and Cattle Remains Using Untargeted Evosep‐timsTOF Mass Spectrometry
Blacka C., Dowle A., Lisowski M., Alexander M., Hendy J., Penkman K., Mosely J.
ABSTRACTRationaleSex estimation by analysis of amelogenin peptides in archaeological and fossil material has recently been gaining great traction within the fields of archaeology and palaeontology. Current widely used proteomic amelogenin sex estimation methods are hindered by relatively long mass spectrometric run times, or targeting peptides specific to human amelogenin proteins. Untargeted, high‐throughput amelogenin sexing would be invaluable for a range of applications, from sex estimation of remains at mass grave sites to broadening the application of rapid amelogenin sexing to non‐hominin species for husbandry and evolutionary studies.MethodsA new acid etch protocol followed by Evosep‐LC‐TIMS‐TOF mass spectrometry is presented for amelogenin analysis, providing global peptide data through rapid mass spectrometric methods in under 20 min per sample (including sample preparation, mass spectrometric acquisition and data processing). This sampling protocol was developed on modern cattle (Bos taurus) teeth, before Evosep‐timsTOF partial validation with archaeological cattle and human (Homo sapiens) teeth, demonstrating the potential of straightforward application of this rapid amelogenin sexing method to a range of taxa.ResultsThe rapid Evosep‐LC‐TIMS‐TOF mass spectrometry methods gave comparable peptide counts to conventional long untargeted methods, while maintaining similar (or faster) acquisition times to those reported in methods targeting specific human amelogenin peptides. Implementation of the novel acid etch sampling approach also streamlined sample preparation without compromising peptide counts.ConclusionsRapid, untargeted Evosep‐LC‐TIMS‐TOF mass spectrometry was successfully implemented in sex estimation of modern and archaeological material from Bos taurus and Homo sapiens teeth. This demonstrates an advancement in low‐cost, high‐throughput amelogenin sex estimation, for both human and zooarchaeological applications.
Q2

Determination of K Isotope Compositions in Sedimentary Rocks and Their Implications for Discriminating Sediment Origin
Cui M., Moynier F., Su B., Hu Y.
ABSTRACTThe advent of a new generation of collision‐cell multicollector inductively‐coupled‐plasma mass‐spectrometers (CC–MC–ICP–MS), the Nu sapphire, has provided a new venue in achieving higher precision K isotopic compositions compared to the older generation of instruments. Here, we take advantage of this new technology to report the K isotopic compositions of eight sediment reference materials. The K isotopic compositions (reported as the δ41K representing the 41K/39K ratios) for these sediment reference materials span a range of 0.2‰: −0.42 ± 0.04‰ (BCSS‐1), −0.51 ± 0.07‰ (MESS‐1), and −0.43 ± 0.01‰ (MESS‐4) for three marine sediments, −0.35 ± 0.07‰ (NIST‐SRM 1646a) for estuarine sediment, −0.40 ± 0.06‰ (NIST‐SRM 2704) and −0.40 ± 0.05‰ (SWR‐3) for two river sediments, −0.55 ± 0.04‰ (NIST‐SRM 1d) for limestone, and −0.46 ± 0.00‰ (SBC‐1) for marine shale. The high‐precision K isotopic data presented herein provide a valuable reference for future quality control and interlaboratory comparisons. Data compilation reveals that biogenic sediments show extremely low K concentrations (K2O = 0.001–0.048 wt.%) and large K isotopic variations (δ41K = −1.88–0.94‰) with an average value of −0.001‰, whereas the abiogenic sediments are featured with light K isotopes (average δ41K value of −0.47‰) and high K concentrations (K2O = 0.52 ~ 4.29 wt.%). This finding suggests that the variation of K isotopes may serve as a useful tool for discriminating the various geneses of sediments.
Q2

Carbon and Nitrogen Isotopic Composition of Duplicate Diet of the Japanese
Yoshinaga J.
ABSTRACTRationaleCarbon and nitrogen stable isotope ratios (δ13C and δ15N) of whole diet have rarely been measured to date though the isotope ratios in human sample have been extensively used for diet and nutritional researches. In order to fully validate the isotope dietary analysis, isotopic information of whole diet is required.Methodsδ13C and δ15N of 150 duplicate diet samples collected in Japan during 2016–2017 were measured. Sixty‐five males and 85 females (mean age: 45 years) donated duplicate diet sample of which δ13C and δ15N were measured by element analyzer‐isotope ratio mass spectrometry.ResultsMean δ13C and δ15N of the 150 duplicate diets were −24.3 (1.1) ‰ and 3.58 (0.93) ‰, respectively, with no gender‐ and age‐dependent variation. δ15N of diet containing seafood (median: 3.60‰, n = 111) was significantly more elevated than that not containing seafood (3.01‰, n = 39). δ15N of Japanese diet is decreasing from 1990s to the present, which is consistent with the national statistics showing decreasing trend of seafood consumption of the Japanese. Contradictory to these observation, dietary δ15N was not elevated in diet samples from the elderlies though the diet of elderlies contained seafood more frequently than those of younger study participants.ConclusionThere were some uncertainties as to whether seafood is a major determinant of dietary δ15N of the Japanese. To further characterize dietary components that determine δ values, isotope ratio analysis of diet of known quantitative dietary components is warranted.
Q2

Combination of Metabolite Analysis and Network Pharmacology to Explore the Potential Anticough Mechanism of Protopine—A Marker in Zhi‐Ke‐Bao Tablets
Zou Q., Chen D., Liu C., Chen Z., Yang X., Xu R., Zhou Z., Chen J., Shi W., Zhang F.
ABSTRACTRationaleProtopine, an active alkaloid in Papaver somniferum L., was abundant in a well‐known anticough traditional Chinese medicine preparation—Zhi‐Ke‐Bao tablets. Till now, the metabolism feature and anticough mechanism of protopine have not been fully elucidated, restricting its further development.MethodsThe metabolites of protopine in rats were profiled by using ultra‐high performance liquid chromatography coupled with time‐of‐flight mass spectrometry, and its anticough targets and mechanism were predicted by network pharmacology.ResultsIn rats, a total of 19 metabolites were identified following ingestion of protopine (21 mg/kg/day, i.g.), including 4 in plasma, 6 in urine, 5 in feces, 10 in liver, 2 in spleen, 4 in lung, 3 in kidney, 3 in heart, and 3 in brain. The main metabolic features were ring‐opening, methylation, demethylation, glucuronidation, sulfation, and hydroxylation. Among them, methylation, sulfation, and hydroxylation of protopine in vivo were revealed for the first time. The network pharmacology results show that protopine and its metabolites regulate physiological activities by acting on STAT3, SRC, CASP3, MTOR, MMP9, ESR1, and other targets, involving PI3K‐Akt signaling pathway, FoxO signaling pathway, and TNF signaling pathway, etc.ConclusionsThe metabolic features of protopine and its potential mechanisms for anticough effects were outlined, providing data for further anticough pharmacological validation of protopine.
Q2

Fast Pyrolysis of Cigarette and Cigar Leaves: Differential Analysis of Their Heavy Products by Ultrahigh‐Resolution Mass Spectrometry
Zhu Z., Zhang C., Shi Y., Zou P., Ding N., Zong K., Jia L., Guo D.
ABSTRACTRationaleThe cigars have characteristic flavors in smoke when compared with cigarettes, and cigars from various origins also have a difference in taste. However, little information can be found about the difference in chemical components of smokes between cigar and cigarette as well as between cigars, so it is interesting to compare their pyrolysis product distribution.MethodsThe cigarette and cigar leaves were pyrolyzed in a microfluidized‐bed reactor, and the pyrolysis vapors were condensed and collected using cold traps. Mass spectrometric analysis of condensed liquids was performed utilizing electrospray ionization‐orbitrap mass spectrometry in both positive and negative ion modes.ResultsThe mass spectra of condensable pyrolysis products of three tobacco leaves were obtained by Orbitrap‐MS in both positive and negative ESI modes. The DBE values (to carbon atom number) and the relative distribution (to nitrogen or oxygen atom number) of different products were carefully compared and discussed.ConclusionThe main difference in pyrolysis products between cigarette and cigar leaves relates to N1–N2 class compounds in high‐mass range as well as highly unsaturated nitrogenated compounds, while the one between two cigar leaves is associated with CxHyOzN5–9 and C30‐50HyOzNw compounds. Besides, the oxygenated products that fall into the H/C > 2 and O/C < 1 ranges are also characteristic for Dominican cigar.
Q2

Pioneering Mass Spectrometry: A Tribute to My Mentor Jean‐François Muller and His Enduring Legacy
Frache G.
ABSTRACTProfessor Jean‐François Muller, a distinguished figure in the field of mass spectrometry, made significant contributions to the advancement of analytical chemistry and its applications. As the founding director of the Laboratory of Mass Spectrometry and Laser Chemistry at the University of Metz, Muller played a pivotal role in establishing Metz as a leading center for mass spectrometry research. His pioneering work, particularly in the development of matrix‐assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI) instrumentation and Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance mass Spectrometry (FTICR MS), has had a profound impact on various scientific disciplines. This article commemorates Professor Muller's illustrious career and highlights his collaborative efforts with industrial partners such as Total, which led to groundbreaking advancements in MS analysis. I will delve into the key findings of my thesis which focused on instrumental developments for MALDI analysis and imaging, as well as personal reminiscences and the impact of his inspiring mentorship.
Q2

Systematic Analysis of the Chemical Components of Gentiana urnula Harry Sm Using SIRIUS and Liquid Chromatography High‐Resolution Mass Spectrometry
Yan Z., Ning J., Luo Z., Li D., Wang H., Xie X.
ABSTRACTRationaleGentiana urnula Harry Sm is a frequently utilized traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) with applications in the treatment of a range of ailments including jaundice, gastrointestinal ulcers, and influenza. Despite its widespread uses, there is a lack of comprehensive researches on the chemical composition.MethodsThis study integrated SIRIUS, quantitative structure‐retention relationship (QSRR), and liquid chromatography high‐resolution mass spectrometry (LC‐HRMS) to identify the compounds in Gentiana urnula Harry Sm.ResultsA total of 213 compounds were identified with high confidence based on retention time (tR), MS1, and MS/MS. Among the 213 compounds, 26 compounds were positively identified firstly in Gentiana urnula Harry Sm. More than 5000 compounds were classified based on MS/MS. Spatial distribution revealed the similarities in compound between roots and stems, while differences were observed between leaves and flowers.ConclusionsThis study lays the foundation for further investigations into the biological activity and pharmacological mechanism of Gentiana urnula Harry Sm.
Q2

Part B: SLICE‐MSI—A Machine Learning Interface for System Suitability Testing of Mass Spectrometry Imaging Platforms
Kibbe R., Mills Q., Sohn A., Muddiman D.
ABSTRACTRationaleThe field of mass spectrometry imaging is currently devoid of standardized protocols or commercially available products designed for system suitability testing of MSI platforms. Machine learning is an approach that can quickly and effectively identify complex patterns in data and use them to make informed classifications, but there is a technical barrier to implementing these algorithms. Here we package the machine learning algorithms into a user‐friendly interface to make community‐wide implementation of this protocol possible.MethodsThe software package is built entirely in the Python language using the PySimpleGUI library for the construction of the interface, Pandas and Numpy libraries for data formatting and manipulation, and the Scikit‐Learn library for the implementation of machine learning algorithms. Training data is collected on an instrument under clean and compromised conditions that can then be used to evaluate model performance and to train models prior to interrogating unknown samples before, during, or after experiments.ResultsDetailed instructions are provided for the effective use of the SLICE‐MSI software package to use machine learning to evaluate instrument condition of MSI platforms. File formatting and generalizable steps are clearly described to make the implementation of this package easy for multiple labs and different MSI platform configurations.ConclusionsIn this protocol, we demonstrate SLICE‐MSI, a machine learning graphical user interface for efficient and easy implementation of QC instrument classification of mass spectrometry imaging platforms.
Q2

Part A: Implementing an Analyte Panel and Sampling Protocol for Quality Control in Mass Spectrometry Imaging
Mills Q., Kibbe R., Sohn A., Percy A., Backiel K., Muddiman D.
ABSTRACTRationaleWhile quality control (QC) and system suitability testing (SST) methods are commonly employed in mass spectrometry, the field of mass spectrometry imaging (MSI) currently lacks any universally accepted QC/SST protocols. These methods can prevent the loss of precious samples due to suboptimal instrument conditions and/or data quality, but they are more challenging to implement on MSI platforms. Herein, a panel of analytes is conveniently analyzed in a setup that reflects a typical MSI imaging experiment, and guidance is provided for downstream QC/SST evaluation.MethodsThe analyte panel will be commercially available and consists of three pairs of unlabeled (NAT) analytes and their stable isotope–labeled (SIL) analogues; a deviation from the standard procedure is also included, which incorporates a polymer to expand m/z coverage. The NAT three‐plex (or four‐plex with the added polymer) is analyzed as a droplet on a slide, and the SIL three‐plex is doped into the electrospray solvent, isolating the NAT and SIL compounds to different source components. Datasets are collected on clean and compromised instruments to inform QC/SST software and later evaluate instrument conditions or isolated metrics of data quality.ResultsA procedure was created for QC/SST analysis on MSI platforms, which can be optionally paired with the freely available software Supervised Learning for Instrument Classification and Evaluation for Mass Spectrometry Imaging (SLICE‐MSI) to classify the condition of the instrument. The SIL data may be monitored separately during imaging experiments for continuous evaluation of electrospray stability. The protocol highlights areas that may be adapted for other ionization sources for widespread use.ConclusionsThe protocol described herein uses a panel of NAT and SIL compounds to offer an objective and accurate determination of QC/SST on MSI platforms.
Q2

Determination of Collisional Cross Section Using Microscale High‐Field Asymmetric Waveform ion Mobility Spectroscopy–Mass Spectrometry (FAIMS‐MS)
Krasnova K., Creaser C., Reynolds J.
ABSTRACTRationaleCollisional cross sections (CCS) are an important characteristic of gas‐phase ions that are measured using ion mobility‐mass spectrometry (IMS). Typically, CCS measurements are performed with drift‐tube IMS or travelling‐wave IMS. However. in a high‐field asymmetric waveform ion mobility (FAIMS) device, ion heating effects make CCS determination more challenging. This research explores whether CCS can be predicted with microscale FAIMS by using known CCS standards.MethodsAn Owlstone ultraFAIMS microscale FAIMS spectrometer was coupled to an Orbitrap Exactive mass spectrometer. Two different CCS standard mixtures (tetraalkylammonium halides [TAAHs] and poly‐DL‐alanine oligomers) were used to evaluate the system's potential to determine CCS. Test peptide bradykinin acetate and substance P were used to evaluate CCS determination accuracy for singly and doubly charged peptide species using external calibration with a series of poly‐DL‐alanine peptides for +1, +2 charge states.ResultsCalibrations with excellent correlation coefficients (R2 = 0.99) for both TAAHs and poly‐DL‐alanine were obtained. Good accuracy of determination was achieved for bradykinin [M + 2H]2+ with a ± 0.5% difference between experimental and published CCS at a dispersion field (DF) strength of 250 Td; the model proved less accurate for bradykinin [M + H]+ (±1.4% at 240 Td). The accuracy of determination for the [M + H]+ and [M + 2H]2+ ions of substance P was within ± 5% and ± 3% at 250 Td, respectively, while at higher DF values, accuracy decreased to approximately 5%.ConclusionsDistinct relationships were observed between CCS and transmission CF with both calibrants. Optimum accuracy was obtained at DF 240–260 Td. At lower DF, accuracy is reduced by insufficient resolution of analyte ions from solvent cluster adducts, while at higher DF values, poor transmission becomes a factor. Nevertheless, these data suggest microscale FAIMS can conduct CCS measurements with reasonable accuracy when the compound being measured has similar structural features to the CCS standards used.
Q2

Improved Protective Effects and Pharmacokinetics of Huperzine A Derivative H14 in Soman Poisoning: A Comparative Study With Huperzine A in Rats
Yang G., Cui Y., Zong X., Jin Q., Zhang Y., Li L., Liu D., Chen X., Wang C., Wei J.
ABSTRACTRationaleN‐[2‐Hydroxy‐3,5‐dimethylbenzilidene]‐Hup A (H14) is a derivative of huperzine A (Hup A) that demonstrates superior protective effects against soman (GD) compared to Hup A. This study aims to evaluate the protective efficacy of H14 pretreatment against GD in rats and to provide an analytical framework for the pharmacokinetic evaluation of H14 in experimental animals.MethodsThe study employed protective ratios (PR) as an evaluation criterion to assess the efficacy of H14 and Hup A in preventing GD in vivo. Liquid–liquid extraction techniques were utilized to extract H14 and its metabolite, Hup A, from plasma. The extracted plasma samples were then analyzed using an ultra‐high‐performance liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC–MS/MS) method for the simultaneous quantification of H14 and Hup A.ResultsThe PR values for the 6‐ and 12‐h Hup A groups were 1.26 and 1.08, respectively. In contrast, the 6, 12, and 24‐h H14 groups demonstrated PR values of 2.81, 1.98, and 1.18, respectively, indicating extended protective capabilities compared to Hup A. All validation parameters for the UHPLC–MS/MS method, including linearity, specificity, precision, accuracy, matrix effect, and stability, met the acceptance criteria established by FDA guidelines. The pharmacokinetic analysis indicates that H14, after conversion to Hup A in vivo, significantly extends the duration of Hup A concentrations in the body, leading to more effective prevention of GD poisoning compared to Hup A alone.ConclusionsH14 demonstrates superior efficacy in preventing GD poisoning compared to Hup A. Furthermore, this analytical approach offers a reliable and efficient method for the pharmacokinetic evaluation of H14 in experimental animals.
Q2

Covalent Organic Framework Nanofilm‐Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization Mass Spectrometry for the Determination of Benzophenone Derivatives in Personal Care Products
Yan L., Zheng W., Lin Z.
ABSTRACTRationalBenzophenone derivatives, commonly used as UV filters in personal care products (PCPs), are widely prevalent and raise concerns due to their endocrine‐disrupting effects. Sensitive and efficient analytical methods are in demand for their detection. In this study, we developed a TAPB‐DMTP‐covalent organic framework (COF) nanofilm‐assisted laser desorption ionization mass spectrometry (LDI‐MS) method for the quantitative analysis of 2,4‐dihydroxybenzophenone (BP‐1) in PCPs.MethodsThe TAPB‐DMTP‐COF nanofilm was synthesized on indium tin oxide (ITO) glass and utilized as an LDI‐MS substrate. The performance of TAPB‐DMTP‐COF nanofilm‐assisted LDI‐MS for analyzing small molecules (e.g., benzophenone derivatives, phthalates, amino acids, sugars, and nucleosides) was compared to conventional organic matrices (α‐cyano‐4‐hydroxycinnamic acid [CHCA], 2,5‐dihydroxybenzoic acid [DHB], and sinapinic acid [SA]). The reproducibility, salt resistance, sensitivity, and stability of the method were further evaluated. Finally, the technique was applied to quantify BP‐1 in PCPs.ResultsThe TAPB‐DMTP‐COF nanofilm‐assisted LDI‐MS provided stronger mass spectral signals and cleaner backgrounds for small molecules compared to CHCA, DHB, and SA. The method exhibited high reproducibility (RSD = 6.10%) and stability for up to 30 days. BP‐1 in PCPs was quantified with excellent linearity (1–20 μg/mL, r = 0.9993), a low detection limit (0.3 μg/mL), and recovery rates of 94.2%–104.4%, demonstrating the potential of TAPB‐DMTP‐COF nanofilm for sensitive and reliable small‐molecule analysis.ConclusionTAPB‐DMTP‐COF nanofilm‐assisted LDI‐MS offered the advantages of rapid analysis, clean backgrounds, and reproducibility for detecting small molecules, including benzophenone derivatives. This method successfully quantified BP‐1 in PCPs, highlighting its suitability for analyzing complex samples.
Q2

Assessing Matrix and Nonmatrix, Single, and Multipoint Calibration of Trace Elements Using LA‐ICP‐MS on a Tropical Speleothem
Sekhon N., Gao A., Mallick S., Partin J., Cardenas M. ., Ibarra D.
ABSTRACTRationaleSuites of trace elements are routinely used in speleothems as proxies to understand periods of past climate change. Laser ablation techniques are regularly implemented to acquire high resolution (50‐μm) trace element concentrations in carbonate archives for paleoclimatology. There exists limited research investigating Laser Ablation‐Inductively Coupled Plasma‐Mass Spectrometry (LA‐ICP‐MS) protocols using speleothem samples. This study investigates the difference between using matrix (carbonate) and nonmatrix (silicate) matched reference materials and the utility of 1‐point versus multiple point calibration curves.MethodsFollowing an extensive review of published literature on speleothem LA‐ICP‐MS analyses, we conducted two laser ablation experimental runs 8 months apart on a 2.7‐cm section of a natural speleothem using matrix and nonmatrix matched reference materials. We used a 193‐nm wavelength Analyte G2 laser attached to a X‐Series‐2 ICP‐MS, a silicate reference material, and three carbonate reference materials. Next, we calculated concentrations using a 1‐point calibration curve, a 2‐point calibration curve, and a 3‐point calibration curve.ResultsThe analysis of matrix and nonmatrix matched reference materials demonstrates that the trends of trace elements/Ca are minimally impacted by the matrix material of the standard. We also show that 2‐ and 3‐point calibration curves bracket the range of sample concentrations compared to a 1‐point (silicate) calibration curve. The calculated cave‐air temperatures using Mg/Ca concentrations fall within error of each other regardless of the calibration curve approach applied.ConclusionsOur experiments provide a proof of concept on the conventional setup of standards during LA‐ICP‐MS speleothem analysis. We suggest the use of at minimum a 2‐point (silicate plus carbonate or carbonates) calibration curve that crucially bracket the range of sample concentrations rather than relying on a 1‐point silicate standard that does not bracket the sample concentration. Finally, our results have implications for both speleothem studies that use LA‐ICP‐MS analytical techniques and additional carbonate archives.
Q2

Exploration of Active Substances and Its Potential Mechanism of Gancao Fuzi Decoction on Inflammatory Based on Metabolomics and Network Pharmacology
Geng W., Liu S., Dong H., Arachchige B., Qi D., Wang X.
ABSTRACTGancao Fuzi decoction (GCFZT) is a traditional Chinese formula, which has been commonly used in clinical practice to treat inflammatory diseases. However, the active substance of GCFZT in the treatment of inflammation is not fully clarified. In this study, we used orthogonal experiments to design different GCFZT formulations, resulting in a total of 16 GCFZT formulations. Subsequently, UPLC‐Q‐TOF‐MS/MS was used to analyze the chemical composition of different formulations, and the anti‐inflammatory activity differences of these formulations were evaluated through an LPS‐induced RAW264.7 inflammatory cell model. Combined with machine learning algorithms such as PLS‐DA and RF, four main active substances in GCFZT were screened. Finally, network pharmacology techniques were used to investigate the potential anti‐inflammatory mechanisms of these main active substances, and the results showed that GCFZT mainly regulates the expression of core targets such as ALOX5, NFKB1, and TLR4 through main active substances such as chlorogenic acid, riboflavin, and formononetin, thereby affecting the NF kappa B signaling pathway, the Toll‐like receptor signaling pathway, and the Th17 cell differentiation. This study provides a reference for the anti‐inflammatory mechanism of GCFZT and a scientific basis for its clinical application.
Top-100
Citing journals
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
|
|
Epigenomics
1065 citations, 2.88%
|
|
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
992 citations, 2.69%
|
|
Clinical Epigenetics
645 citations, 1.75%
|
|
Scientific Reports
516 citations, 1.4%
|
|
Cancers
474 citations, 1.28%
|
|
Epigenetics
471 citations, 1.28%
|
|
PLoS ONE
453 citations, 1.23%
|
|
Frontiers in Genetics
415 citations, 1.12%
|
|
Frontiers in Oncology
350 citations, 0.95%
|
|
Genes
264 citations, 0.71%
|
|
Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
260 citations, 0.7%
|
|
Oncotarget
242 citations, 0.66%
|
|
Cells
229 citations, 0.62%
|
|
Frontiers in Immunology
221 citations, 0.6%
|
|
Nature Communications
210 citations, 0.57%
|
|
Nucleic Acids Research
177 citations, 0.48%
|
|
Aging
162 citations, 0.44%
|
|
Methods in Molecular Biology
154 citations, 0.42%
|
|
Nutrients
135 citations, 0.37%
|
|
Biomedicine and Pharmacotherapy
128 citations, 0.35%
|
|
Pathology Research and Practice
125 citations, 0.34%
|
|
Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology
125 citations, 0.34%
|
|
BMC Cancer
121 citations, 0.33%
|
|
Biomedicines
121 citations, 0.33%
|
|
Biomolecules
110 citations, 0.3%
|
|
Oncology Letters
107 citations, 0.29%
|
|
BMC Genomics
106 citations, 0.29%
|
|
Frontiers in Endocrinology
104 citations, 0.28%
|
|
Frontiers in Pharmacology
97 citations, 0.26%
|
|
Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews
95 citations, 0.26%
|
|
Translational Psychiatry
95 citations, 0.26%
|
|
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
91 citations, 0.25%
|
|
Gene
91 citations, 0.25%
|
|
Genome Biology
89 citations, 0.24%
|
|
Epigenetics and Chromatin
83 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Human Molecular Genetics
82 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Cancer Cell International
82 citations, 0.22%
|
|
European Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
77 citations, 0.21%
|
|
Seminars in Cancer Biology
77 citations, 0.21%
|
|
Environmental International
76 citations, 0.21%
|
|
Cell Death and Disease
72 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Cancer Letters
71 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Journal of Medicinal Chemistry
69 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Journal of Biological Chemistry
69 citations, 0.19%
|
|
Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
68 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Journal of Cellular Physiology
68 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Frontiers in Neuroscience
68 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Molecular Medicine Reports
67 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Molecular Psychiatry
66 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Heliyon
65 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications
62 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Molecules
61 citations, 0.17%
|
|
BMC Bioinformatics
61 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Pharmacology and Therapeutics
61 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
60 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Molecular Cancer
60 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Oncology Reports
59 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Frontiers in Psychiatry
58 citations, 0.16%
|
|
Environmental Research
56 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Environmental Health Perspectives
56 citations, 0.15%
|
|
BioMed Research International
55 citations, 0.15%
|
|
International Journal of Cancer
55 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Pediatric Research
54 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Epigenomes
54 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Science of the Total Environment
52 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine
52 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Journal of Clinical Medicine
52 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Current environmental health reports
51 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Journal of Translational Medicine
51 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Bioinformatics
51 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience
51 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Molecular Biology Reports
50 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Oncogene
50 citations, 0.14%
|
|
Journal of Cellular Biochemistry
49 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
47 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Genomics
47 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Molecular Neurobiology
47 citations, 0.13%
|
|
Life Sciences
46 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Pharmacological Research
46 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Biology
45 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine
45 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Journal of Experimental and Clinical Cancer Research
44 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Bioscience Reports
43 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Ageing Research Reviews
43 citations, 0.12%
|
|
FASEB Journal
43 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
43 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Medicine (United States)
43 citations, 0.12%
|
|
PLoS Genetics
42 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Clinical Cancer Research
42 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Briefings in Bioinformatics
42 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Environmental Epigenetics
42 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Biochimica et Biophysica Acta - Reviews on Cancer
41 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Expert Review of Molecular Diagnostics
41 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Cell Reports
40 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Communications Biology
40 citations, 0.11%
|
|
International Journal of Oncology
40 citations, 0.11%
|
|
International Journal of Epidemiology
40 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Tumor Biology
39 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Genome Research
39 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Molecular Therapy - Nucleic Acids
39 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
|
Citing publishers
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
|
|
Elsevier
7539 citations, 20.41%
|
|
Springer Nature
7139 citations, 19.33%
|
|
MDPI
3418 citations, 9.25%
|
|
Wiley
2564 citations, 6.94%
|
|
Frontiers Media S.A.
2282 citations, 6.18%
|
|
Taylor & Francis
2124 citations, 5.75%
|
|
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
1116 citations, 3.02%
|
|
Oxford University Press
1105 citations, 2.99%
|
|
571 citations, 1.55%
|
|
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
567 citations, 1.53%
|
|
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
457 citations, 1.24%
|
|
Spandidos Publications
431 citations, 1.17%
|
|
Impact Journals
421 citations, 1.14%
|
|
SAGE
380 citations, 1.03%
|
|
Hindawi Limited
362 citations, 0.98%
|
|
American Chemical Society (ACS)
328 citations, 0.89%
|
|
Bentham Science Publishers Ltd.
221 citations, 0.6%
|
|
American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)
200 citations, 0.54%
|
|
Mary Ann Liebert
186 citations, 0.5%
|
|
Cambridge University Press
181 citations, 0.49%
|
|
Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
142 citations, 0.38%
|
|
AME Publishing Company
134 citations, 0.36%
|
|
S. Karger AG
105 citations, 0.28%
|
|
BMJ
101 citations, 0.27%
|
|
American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology
95 citations, 0.26%
|
|
Pleiades Publishing
92 citations, 0.25%
|
|
American Physiological Society
90 citations, 0.24%
|
|
Baishideng Publishing Group
90 citations, 0.24%
|
|
Walter de Gruyter
82 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)
79 citations, 0.21%
|
|
The Endocrine Society
74 citations, 0.2%
|
|
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
74 citations, 0.2%
|
|
IntechOpen
68 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Portland Press
67 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB)
66 citations, 0.18%
|
|
65 citations, 0.18%
|
|
American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)
63 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Annual Reviews
62 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
61 citations, 0.17%
|
|
Environmental Health Perspectives
61 citations, 0.17%
|
|
American Society for Clinical Investigation
56 citations, 0.15%
|
|
eLife Sciences Publications
56 citations, 0.15%
|
|
IOS Press
55 citations, 0.15%
|
|
The Company of Biologists
51 citations, 0.14%
|
|
American Society for Microbiology
50 citations, 0.14%
|
|
PeerJ
44 citations, 0.12%
|
|
Bioscientifica
42 citations, 0.11%
|
|
American Society for Nutrition
41 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Research Square Platform LLC
41 citations, 0.11%
|
|
OAE Publishing Inc.
36 citations, 0.1%
|
|
The Royal Society
35 citations, 0.09%
|
|
F1000 Research
34 citations, 0.09%
|
|
American Society of Hematology
33 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Canadian Science Publishing
33 citations, 0.09%
|
|
Society for the Study of Reproduction
32 citations, 0.09%
|
|
European Molecular Biology Organization
31 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Rockefeller University Press
28 citations, 0.08%
|
|
Neoplasia Press
24 citations, 0.06%
|
|
American Medical Association (AMA)
21 citations, 0.06%
|
|
Society for Neuroscience
20 citations, 0.05%
|
|
European Respiratory Society (ERS)
20 citations, 0.05%
|
|
Medknow
20 citations, 0.05%
|
|
American Thoracic Society
19 citations, 0.05%
|
|
The American Association of Immunologists
19 citations, 0.05%
|
|
American Diabetes Association
17 citations, 0.05%
|
|
American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics
16 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Publishing House ABV Press
16 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Hans Publishers
16 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Eco-Vector LLC
15 citations, 0.04%
|
|
The Korean Society of Genetics
13 citations, 0.04%
|
|
Higher Education Press
12 citations, 0.03%
|
|
American Institute of Mathematical Sciences (AIMS)
12 citations, 0.03%
|
|
12 citations, 0.03%
|
|
American Scientific Publishers
11 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Social Science Electronic Publishing
11 citations, 0.03%
|
|
EDP Sciences
10 citations, 0.03%
|
|
IOP Publishing
10 citations, 0.03%
|
|
Scientific Research Publishing
10 citations, 0.03%
|
|
9 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Asian Pacific Organization for Cancer Prevention
9 citations, 0.02%
|
|
9 citations, 0.02%
|
|
The Russian Academy of Sciences
9 citations, 0.02%
|
|
American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
8 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Begell House
8 citations, 0.02%
|
|
American Academy of Pediatrics
8 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Aging and Disease
8 citations, 0.02%
|
|
European Society of Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS)
8 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Pharmaceutical Society of Japan
7 citations, 0.02%
|
|
AIP Publishing
7 citations, 0.02%
|
|
7 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology (ARVO)
7 citations, 0.02%
|
|
The Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology
7 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Oceanside Publications, Inc.
7 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Moffitt Cancer Center
7 citations, 0.02%
|
|
CSIRO Publishing
7 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishing
7 citations, 0.02%
|
|
University of Chicago Press
6 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Korean Cancer Association
6 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Edizioni Minerva Medica
6 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Editions E D K
6 citations, 0.02%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
|
Publishing organizations
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
|
|
Harvard University
64 publications, 3.74%
|
|
Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico
29 publications, 1.7%
|
|
Nanjing Medical University
27 publications, 1.58%
|
|
University of Melbourne
27 publications, 1.58%
|
|
Boston University
25 publications, 1.46%
|
|
Emory University
25 publications, 1.46%
|
|
Johns Hopkins University
24 publications, 1.4%
|
|
Columbia University
24 publications, 1.4%
|
|
Brown University
22 publications, 1.29%
|
|
Shanghai Jiao Tong University
21 publications, 1.23%
|
|
Murdoch Children's Research Institute
20 publications, 1.17%
|
|
McGill University
20 publications, 1.17%
|
|
Mayo Clinic
20 publications, 1.17%
|
|
Massachusetts General Hospital
19 publications, 1.11%
|
|
Zhejiang University
18 publications, 1.05%
|
|
University of Pisa
18 publications, 1.05%
|
|
Shandong University
18 publications, 1.05%
|
|
University of Bristol
18 publications, 1.05%
|
|
Sun Yat-sen University
17 publications, 0.99%
|
|
University of Michigan
17 publications, 0.99%
|
|
University of British Columbia
17 publications, 0.99%
|
|
Karolinska Institute
16 publications, 0.94%
|
|
University College London
16 publications, 0.94%
|
|
Soochow University (Suzhou)
16 publications, 0.94%
|
|
Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences
15 publications, 0.88%
|
|
Fudan University
15 publications, 0.88%
|
|
Xiangya Hospital Central South University
15 publications, 0.88%
|
|
University of New South Wales
15 publications, 0.88%
|
|
University of Milan
15 publications, 0.88%
|
|
University of Oxford
15 publications, 0.88%
|
|
Université de Sherbrooke
15 publications, 0.88%
|
|
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College
14 publications, 0.82%
|
|
Université Laval
14 publications, 0.82%
|
|
Central South University
13 publications, 0.76%
|
|
University of Southern California
13 publications, 0.76%
|
|
Harbin Medical University
13 publications, 0.76%
|
|
Dartmouth College
13 publications, 0.76%
|
|
People's Liberation Army General Hospital and Medical School (301 Hospital)
13 publications, 0.76%
|
|
Amsterdam University Medical Center
13 publications, 0.76%
|
|
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
13 publications, 0.76%
|
|
Peking University
12 publications, 0.7%
|
|
Southeast University
12 publications, 0.7%
|
|
Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne
12 publications, 0.7%
|
|
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
12 publications, 0.7%
|
|
University of Toronto
12 publications, 0.7%
|
|
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
12 publications, 0.7%
|
|
Tehran University of Medical Sciences
11 publications, 0.64%
|
|
University of Helsinki
11 publications, 0.64%
|
|
Imperial College London
11 publications, 0.64%
|
|
University of Cambridge
11 publications, 0.64%
|
|
University of Copenhagen
11 publications, 0.64%
|
|
King's College London
11 publications, 0.64%
|
|
Monash University
11 publications, 0.64%
|
|
University of Illinois at Chicago
11 publications, 0.64%
|
|
Tulane University
11 publications, 0.64%
|
|
Tongji University
10 publications, 0.58%
|
|
Chongqing Medical University
10 publications, 0.58%
|
|
University of Naples Federico II
10 publications, 0.58%
|
|
Southern Medical University
10 publications, 0.58%
|
|
University of Southampton
10 publications, 0.58%
|
|
Northwestern University
10 publications, 0.58%
|
|
Wenzhou Medical University
10 publications, 0.58%
|
|
Zhengzhou University
10 publications, 0.58%
|
|
Newcastle University
10 publications, 0.58%
|
|
German Cancer Research Center
10 publications, 0.58%
|
|
Baylor College of Medicine
10 publications, 0.58%
|
|
Leiden University Medical Center
10 publications, 0.58%
|
|
University of Pennsylvania
10 publications, 0.58%
|
|
Western University
10 publications, 0.58%
|
|
University of Alabama at Birmingham
10 publications, 0.58%
|
|
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
10 publications, 0.58%
|
|
Pasteur Institute of Iran
9 publications, 0.53%
|
|
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences
9 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Heidelberg University
9 publications, 0.53%
|
|
China Medical University (Liaoning)
9 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Chinese University of Hong Kong
9 publications, 0.53%
|
|
University of California, Berkeley
9 publications, 0.53%
|
|
University of California, Los Angeles
9 publications, 0.53%
|
|
University of California, San Francisco
9 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Agency for Science, Technology and Research
9 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Sheffield Hallam University
9 publications, 0.53%
|
|
University of Barcelona
9 publications, 0.53%
|
|
Iran University of Medical Sciences
8 publications, 0.47%
|
|
Jilin University
8 publications, 0.47%
|
|
Cornell University
8 publications, 0.47%
|
|
University of Sydney
8 publications, 0.47%
|
|
University of Otago
8 publications, 0.47%
|
|
University of California, San Diego
8 publications, 0.47%
|
|
University of Cologne
8 publications, 0.47%
|
|
University of Minnesota
8 publications, 0.47%
|
|
University Medical Center Utrecht
8 publications, 0.47%
|
|
Van Andel Institute
8 publications, 0.47%
|
|
University of Wisconsin–Madison
8 publications, 0.47%
|
|
University of Porto
8 publications, 0.47%
|
|
University of Exeter
8 publications, 0.47%
|
|
University of Connecticut Health
8 publications, 0.47%
|
|
Mashhad University of Medical Sciences
7 publications, 0.41%
|
|
Tabriz University of Medical Sciences
7 publications, 0.41%
|
|
Kashan University of Medical Sciences
7 publications, 0.41%
|
|
Huazhong University of Science and Technology
7 publications, 0.41%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
|
Publishing organizations in 5 years
5
10
15
20
25
|
|
Harvard University
22 publications, 3.44%
|
|
Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences
15 publications, 2.34%
|
|
Istituti di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico
14 publications, 2.19%
|
|
Zhejiang University
12 publications, 1.88%
|
|
Shanghai Jiao Tong University
12 publications, 1.88%
|
|
Brown University
12 publications, 1.88%
|
|
University of Pisa
11 publications, 1.72%
|
|
Emory University
11 publications, 1.72%
|
|
Nanjing Medical University
10 publications, 1.56%
|
|
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College
10 publications, 1.56%
|
|
Tehran University of Medical Sciences
9 publications, 1.41%
|
|
Central South University
9 publications, 1.41%
|
|
Harbin Medical University
9 publications, 1.41%
|
|
Boston University
9 publications, 1.41%
|
|
Massachusetts General Hospital
9 publications, 1.41%
|
|
Shandong University
9 publications, 1.41%
|
|
University of British Columbia
9 publications, 1.41%
|
|
University of Oxford
8 publications, 1.25%
|
|
Columbia University
8 publications, 1.25%
|
|
Wenzhou Medical University
8 publications, 1.25%
|
|
Dartmouth College
8 publications, 1.25%
|
|
Mashhad University of Medical Sciences
7 publications, 1.09%
|
|
Pasteur Institute of Iran
7 publications, 1.09%
|
|
Peking University
7 publications, 1.09%
|
|
Tongji University
7 publications, 1.09%
|
|
Chongqing Medical University
7 publications, 1.09%
|
|
Soochow University (Suzhou)
7 publications, 1.09%
|
|
China Medical University (Liaoning)
7 publications, 1.09%
|
|
Zhengzhou University
7 publications, 1.09%
|
|
Tabriz University of Medical Sciences
6 publications, 0.94%
|
|
Kashan University of Medical Sciences
6 publications, 0.94%
|
|
Iran University of Medical Sciences
6 publications, 0.94%
|
|
Xiangya Hospital Central South University
6 publications, 0.94%
|
|
University of Naples Federico II
6 publications, 0.94%
|
|
Sun Yat-sen University
6 publications, 0.94%
|
|
Southern Medical University
6 publications, 0.94%
|
|
University of Bari Aldo Moro
6 publications, 0.94%
|
|
University of Melbourne
6 publications, 0.94%
|
|
Monash University
6 publications, 0.94%
|
|
University of California, San Francisco
6 publications, 0.94%
|
|
University of Michigan
6 publications, 0.94%
|
|
Université de Sherbrooke
6 publications, 0.94%
|
|
Amsterdam University Medical Center
6 publications, 0.94%
|
|
Van Andel Institute
6 publications, 0.94%
|
|
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
6 publications, 0.94%
|
|
Huazhong University of Science and Technology
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
Fudan University
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
Karolinska Institute
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
Nanchang University
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
University of Cambridge
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
University of Palermo
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
Cornell University
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
Anhui Medical University
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
University of Rome Tor Vergata
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
Shandong First Medical University
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
Murdoch Children's Research Institute
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
University of California, Berkeley
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
University of Bristol
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
McGill University
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
Tulane University
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
People's Liberation Army General Hospital and Medical School (301 Hospital)
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
Sheffield Hallam University
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
Mayo Clinic
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
University of Exeter
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
Université Paris-Saclay
5 publications, 0.78%
|
|
Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Delhi
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Sichuan University
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Southeast University
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Wuhan University
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Capital Medical University
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Jinan University
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Xiamen University
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
University of Copenhagen
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
University of Manchester
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
University of Southern California
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Johns Hopkins University
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
IRCCS Neuromed Mediterranean Neurological Institute
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Columbia University Irving Medical Center
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Chinese University of Hong Kong
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Northwestern University
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
University of California, San Diego
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Kunming Medical University
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Leiden University Medical Center
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
University of Pennsylvania
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
UPMC Hillman Cancer Center
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
Université Laval
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
University of Ljubljana
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
4 publications, 0.63%
|
|
University of Jeddah
3 publications, 0.47%
|
|
Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences and Health Services
3 publications, 0.47%
|
|
Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani
3 publications, 0.47%
|
|
Qazvin University of Medical Sciences
3 publications, 0.47%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
5
10
15
20
25
|
Publishing countries
100
200
300
400
500
600
|
|
USA
|
USA, 548, 32.05%
USA
548 publications, 32.05%
|
China
|
China, 374, 21.87%
China
374 publications, 21.87%
|
United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom, 175, 10.23%
United Kingdom
175 publications, 10.23%
|
Canada
|
Canada, 99, 5.79%
Canada
99 publications, 5.79%
|
Germany
|
Germany, 96, 5.61%
Germany
96 publications, 5.61%
|
Italy
|
Italy, 96, 5.61%
Italy
96 publications, 5.61%
|
France
|
France, 86, 5.03%
France
86 publications, 5.03%
|
India
|
India, 66, 3.86%
India
66 publications, 3.86%
|
Australia
|
Australia, 62, 3.63%
Australia
62 publications, 3.63%
|
Netherlands
|
Netherlands, 57, 3.33%
Netherlands
57 publications, 3.33%
|
Spain
|
Spain, 47, 2.75%
Spain
47 publications, 2.75%
|
Iran
|
Iran, 37, 2.16%
Iran
37 publications, 2.16%
|
Sweden
|
Sweden, 33, 1.93%
Sweden
33 publications, 1.93%
|
Japan
|
Japan, 33, 1.93%
Japan
33 publications, 1.93%
|
Brazil
|
Brazil, 28, 1.64%
Brazil
28 publications, 1.64%
|
Denmark
|
Denmark, 22, 1.29%
Denmark
22 publications, 1.29%
|
Switzerland
|
Switzerland, 19, 1.11%
Switzerland
19 publications, 1.11%
|
Belgium
|
Belgium, 17, 0.99%
Belgium
17 publications, 0.99%
|
Singapore
|
Singapore, 17, 0.99%
Singapore
17 publications, 0.99%
|
Republic of Korea
|
Republic of Korea, 15, 0.88%
Republic of Korea
15 publications, 0.88%
|
Poland
|
Poland, 14, 0.82%
Poland
14 publications, 0.82%
|
Finland
|
Finland, 13, 0.76%
Finland
13 publications, 0.76%
|
South Africa
|
South Africa, 13, 0.76%
South Africa
13 publications, 0.76%
|
New Zealand
|
New Zealand, 11, 0.64%
New Zealand
11 publications, 0.64%
|
Norway
|
Norway, 11, 0.64%
Norway
11 publications, 0.64%
|
Portugal
|
Portugal, 10, 0.58%
Portugal
10 publications, 0.58%
|
Greece
|
Greece, 10, 0.58%
Greece
10 publications, 0.58%
|
Saudi Arabia
|
Saudi Arabia, 10, 0.58%
Saudi Arabia
10 publications, 0.58%
|
Russia
|
Russia, 9, 0.53%
Russia
9 publications, 0.53%
|
Austria
|
Austria, 9, 0.53%
Austria
9 publications, 0.53%
|
Mexico
|
Mexico, 9, 0.53%
Mexico
9 publications, 0.53%
|
Egypt
|
Egypt, 8, 0.47%
Egypt
8 publications, 0.47%
|
Ireland
|
Ireland, 8, 0.47%
Ireland
8 publications, 0.47%
|
Czech Republic
|
Czech Republic, 8, 0.47%
Czech Republic
8 publications, 0.47%
|
Israel
|
Israel, 7, 0.41%
Israel
7 publications, 0.41%
|
Thailand
|
Thailand, 7, 0.41%
Thailand
7 publications, 0.41%
|
Turkey
|
Turkey, 7, 0.41%
Turkey
7 publications, 0.41%
|
Chile
|
Chile, 7, 0.41%
Chile
7 publications, 0.41%
|
Qatar
|
Qatar, 6, 0.35%
Qatar
6 publications, 0.35%
|
Luxembourg
|
Luxembourg, 6, 0.35%
Luxembourg
6 publications, 0.35%
|
Slovenia
|
Slovenia, 5, 0.29%
Slovenia
5 publications, 0.29%
|
Estonia
|
Estonia, 4, 0.23%
Estonia
4 publications, 0.23%
|
Croatia
|
Croatia, 4, 0.23%
Croatia
4 publications, 0.23%
|
Uganda
|
Uganda, 3, 0.18%
Uganda
3 publications, 0.18%
|
Bulgaria
|
Bulgaria, 2, 0.12%
Bulgaria
2 publications, 0.12%
|
Hungary
|
Hungary, 2, 0.12%
Hungary
2 publications, 0.12%
|
Malaysia
|
Malaysia, 2, 0.12%
Malaysia
2 publications, 0.12%
|
Pakistan
|
Pakistan, 2, 0.12%
Pakistan
2 publications, 0.12%
|
Rwanda
|
Rwanda, 2, 0.12%
Rwanda
2 publications, 0.12%
|
Ukraine
|
Ukraine, 1, 0.06%
Ukraine
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Argentina
|
Argentina, 1, 0.06%
Argentina
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Armenia
|
Armenia, 1, 0.06%
Armenia
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Ghana
|
Ghana, 1, 0.06%
Ghana
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Honduras
|
Honduras, 1, 0.06%
Honduras
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Iraq
|
Iraq, 1, 0.06%
Iraq
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Colombia
|
Colombia, 1, 0.06%
Colombia
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Kuwait
|
Kuwait, 1, 0.06%
Kuwait
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Latvia
|
Latvia, 1, 0.06%
Latvia
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Lebanon
|
Lebanon, 1, 0.06%
Lebanon
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Malta
|
Malta, 1, 0.06%
Malta
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Nigeria
|
Nigeria, 1, 0.06%
Nigeria
1 publication, 0.06%
|
UAE
|
UAE, 1, 0.06%
UAE
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Oman
|
Oman, 1, 0.06%
Oman
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Romania
|
Romania, 1, 0.06%
Romania
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Serbia
|
Serbia, 1, 0.06%
Serbia
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Slovakia
|
Slovakia, 1, 0.06%
Slovakia
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Uruguay
|
Uruguay, 1, 0.06%
Uruguay
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Ethiopia
|
Ethiopia, 1, 0.06%
Ethiopia
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Kosovo
|
Kosovo, 1, 0.06%
Kosovo
1 publication, 0.06%
|
Show all (39 more) | |
100
200
300
400
500
600
|
Publishing countries in 5 years
50
100
150
200
250
|
|
China
|
China, 206, 32.19%
China
206 publications, 32.19%
|
USA
|
USA, 171, 26.72%
USA
171 publications, 26.72%
|
United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom, 56, 8.75%
United Kingdom
56 publications, 8.75%
|
India
|
India, 46, 7.19%
India
46 publications, 7.19%
|
Italy
|
Italy, 43, 6.72%
Italy
43 publications, 6.72%
|
Iran
|
Iran, 32, 5%
Iran
32 publications, 5%
|
Canada
|
Canada, 30, 4.69%
Canada
30 publications, 4.69%
|
France
|
France, 26, 4.06%
France
26 publications, 4.06%
|
Netherlands
|
Netherlands, 20, 3.13%
Netherlands
20 publications, 3.13%
|
Germany
|
Germany, 17, 2.66%
Germany
17 publications, 2.66%
|
Brazil
|
Brazil, 17, 2.66%
Brazil
17 publications, 2.66%
|
Australia
|
Australia, 14, 2.19%
Australia
14 publications, 2.19%
|
Spain
|
Spain, 13, 2.03%
Spain
13 publications, 2.03%
|
Sweden
|
Sweden, 11, 1.72%
Sweden
11 publications, 1.72%
|
Japan
|
Japan, 10, 1.56%
Japan
10 publications, 1.56%
|
South Africa
|
South Africa, 9, 1.41%
South Africa
9 publications, 1.41%
|
Belgium
|
Belgium, 7, 1.09%
Belgium
7 publications, 1.09%
|
Denmark
|
Denmark, 7, 1.09%
Denmark
7 publications, 1.09%
|
Chile
|
Chile, 7, 1.09%
Chile
7 publications, 1.09%
|
Switzerland
|
Switzerland, 6, 0.94%
Switzerland
6 publications, 0.94%
|
Egypt
|
Egypt, 5, 0.78%
Egypt
5 publications, 0.78%
|
Saudi Arabia
|
Saudi Arabia, 5, 0.78%
Saudi Arabia
5 publications, 0.78%
|
Ireland
|
Ireland, 4, 0.63%
Ireland
4 publications, 0.63%
|
Norway
|
Norway, 4, 0.63%
Norway
4 publications, 0.63%
|
Slovenia
|
Slovenia, 4, 0.63%
Slovenia
4 publications, 0.63%
|
Finland
|
Finland, 4, 0.63%
Finland
4 publications, 0.63%
|
Greece
|
Greece, 3, 0.47%
Greece
3 publications, 0.47%
|
Israel
|
Israel, 3, 0.47%
Israel
3 publications, 0.47%
|
Qatar
|
Qatar, 3, 0.47%
Qatar
3 publications, 0.47%
|
Thailand
|
Thailand, 3, 0.47%
Thailand
3 publications, 0.47%
|
Uganda
|
Uganda, 3, 0.47%
Uganda
3 publications, 0.47%
|
Croatia
|
Croatia, 3, 0.47%
Croatia
3 publications, 0.47%
|
Russia
|
Russia, 2, 0.31%
Russia
2 publications, 0.31%
|
Portugal
|
Portugal, 2, 0.31%
Portugal
2 publications, 0.31%
|
Austria
|
Austria, 2, 0.31%
Austria
2 publications, 0.31%
|
Bulgaria
|
Bulgaria, 2, 0.31%
Bulgaria
2 publications, 0.31%
|
Mexico
|
Mexico, 2, 0.31%
Mexico
2 publications, 0.31%
|
New Zealand
|
New Zealand, 2, 0.31%
New Zealand
2 publications, 0.31%
|
Pakistan
|
Pakistan, 2, 0.31%
Pakistan
2 publications, 0.31%
|
Poland
|
Poland, 2, 0.31%
Poland
2 publications, 0.31%
|
Republic of Korea
|
Republic of Korea, 2, 0.31%
Republic of Korea
2 publications, 0.31%
|
Rwanda
|
Rwanda, 2, 0.31%
Rwanda
2 publications, 0.31%
|
Turkey
|
Turkey, 2, 0.31%
Turkey
2 publications, 0.31%
|
Czech Republic
|
Czech Republic, 2, 0.31%
Czech Republic
2 publications, 0.31%
|
Ukraine
|
Ukraine, 1, 0.16%
Ukraine
1 publication, 0.16%
|
Estonia
|
Estonia, 1, 0.16%
Estonia
1 publication, 0.16%
|
Ghana
|
Ghana, 1, 0.16%
Ghana
1 publication, 0.16%
|
Honduras
|
Honduras, 1, 0.16%
Honduras
1 publication, 0.16%
|
Iraq
|
Iraq, 1, 0.16%
Iraq
1 publication, 0.16%
|
Latvia
|
Latvia, 1, 0.16%
Latvia
1 publication, 0.16%
|
Lebanon
|
Lebanon, 1, 0.16%
Lebanon
1 publication, 0.16%
|
Nigeria
|
Nigeria, 1, 0.16%
Nigeria
1 publication, 0.16%
|
UAE
|
UAE, 1, 0.16%
UAE
1 publication, 0.16%
|
Serbia
|
Serbia, 1, 0.16%
Serbia
1 publication, 0.16%
|
Slovakia
|
Slovakia, 1, 0.16%
Slovakia
1 publication, 0.16%
|
Uruguay
|
Uruguay, 1, 0.16%
Uruguay
1 publication, 0.16%
|
Ethiopia
|
Ethiopia, 1, 0.16%
Ethiopia
1 publication, 0.16%
|
Kosovo
|
Kosovo, 1, 0.16%
Kosovo
1 publication, 0.16%
|
Show all (28 more) | |
50
100
150
200
250
|
2 profile journal articles
Shtratnikova Victoria

Lomonosov Moscow State University
44 publications,
573 citations
h-index: 14
1 profile journal article
Zharova Anna-Maria

Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod
1 publication
h-index: 0
Research interests
Epigenetics
Immunology
Molecular biology
1 profile journal article
Raitoharju Emma
53 publications,
3 828 citations
h-index: 23
1 profile journal article
Colombo Teresa
38 publications,
2 081 citations
h-index: 22