You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Physical clustering of FLC alleles during Polycomb-mediated epigenetic silencing in vernalization
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genes & Development, September 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1101/gad.221713.113 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stefanie Rosa, Filomena De Lucia, Joshua S. Mylne, Danling Zhu, Nobuko Ohmido, Ali Pendle, Naohiro Kato, Peter Shaw, Caroline Dean |
| Abstract |
Vernalization, the promotion of flowering by cold, involves Polycomb-mediated epigenetic silencing of FLOWERING LOCUS C (FLC). Cold progressively promotes cell-autonomous switching to a silenced state. Here, we used live-cell imaging of FLC-lacO to monitor changes in nuclear organization during vernalization. FLC-lacO alleles physically cluster during the cold and generally remain so after plants are returned to warm. Clustering is dependent on the Polycomb trans-factors necessary for establishment of the FLC silenced state but not on LIKE HETEROCHROMATIN PROTEIN 1, which functions to maintain silencing. These data support the view that physical clustering may be a common feature of Polycomb-mediated epigenetic switching mechanisms. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 67% |
| Australia | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 4 | 3% |
| United States | 2 | 1% |
| New Zealand | 2 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| Japan | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 138 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 36 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 35 | 23% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 9% |
| Professor | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 23 | 15% |
| Unknown | 19 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 93 | 62% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 30 | 20% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 1% |
| Mathematics | 1 | <1% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 3 | 2% |
| Unknown | 21 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 78. 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 01 March 2020.
All research outputs
#505,798
of 24,059,832 outputs
Outputs from Genes & Development
#79
of 5,905 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,071
of 201,398 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genes & Development
#3
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,059,832 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,905 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 201,398 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 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 95% of its contemporaries.