| Title |
Ophiostomatoid fungi associated with mangroves in South Africa, including Ophiostoma palustre sp. nov.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10482-016-0757-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
J. Alexander Osorio, Z. Wilhelm De Beer, Michael J. Wingfield, Jolanda Roux |
| Abstract |
Mangrove trees are continuously under stress due to environmental and/or anthropogenic pressures, which expose them to attack by pathogens, compromising their survival. Ophiostomatoid fungi cause sap stain and diseases of a wide spectrum of tree species globally. These fungi infect trees through natural, insect, animal and/or human made wounds. During routine surveys of mangrove trees in South Africa, wounds on branches and stems of Avicennia marina were regularly monitored for the presence of ophiostomatoid fungi at ten study sites in the country. The stems of four mangrove species, A. marina, Bruguiera gymnorrhiza, Rhizophora mucronata and Barringtonia racemosa were also wounded and evaluated for the appearance of these fungi. Ophiostomatoid fungi were obtained from the mangrove associate B. racemosa, but not from any of the true mangroves. Analyses of DNA sequence data for the internal transcribed spacer, β-tubulin, calmodulin and translation elongation factor gene regions revealed that the fungi isolated from the wounds on B. racemosa belong to three species in the Ophiostomataceae, including a new taxon described here as Ophiostoma palustre sp. nov. These results suggest that the mangrove associate B. racemosa is more prone to colonization by ophiostomatoid fungi than the true mangroves. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 3 | 75% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 12% |
| Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Researcher | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 24% |
| Unknown | 5 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 32% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 12% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 8% |
| Engineering | 2 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 06 September 2016.
All research outputs
#15,015,034
of 25,728,350 outputs
Outputs from Antonie van Leeuwenhoek
#1,299
of 2,176 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#190,462
of 352,560 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Antonie van Leeuwenhoek
#9
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,728,350 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,176 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 352,560 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 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 62% of its contemporaries.