| Title |
Olivibacter flavus sp. nov., a novel endophytic bacterium isolated from the root of Camellia sinensis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Archives of Microbiology, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00203-017-1391-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lei Tian, Tong-Wei Guan, Ling-Ling Yang, Kai-Yang Lu, Bing-Bing Liu, Wei-Xun ChunYu, Min Yin, En-Yuan Li, Yang Ji, Xiao-Ping Zhang, Shu-Kun Tang |
| Abstract |
A novel Gram-negative rod, endophytic bacterium, designated strain TMCC 8258(T), was isolated from the root of Camellia sinensis collected from Puer, south-west China. Comparative 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis showed that the strain belongs to the family Sphingobacteriaceae and a neighbour-joining phylogenetic tree suggested that strain TMCC 8258(T) formed a cluster with the type strain of Olivibacter ginsengisoli (showed the highest 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity of 95.8%). Chemotaxonomic data [major fatty acid iso-C15:0, summed feature 3 (C16:1 ω7c and/or C16:1 ω6c), iso-C17:0 3-OH and major respiratory quinone MK-7] confirmed the affiliation of strain TMCC 8258(T) to the genus Olivibacter. The G + C content was 39.1 mol %. The results of the phylogenetic analysis, together with the physiological, morphological and biochemical tests, suggested that strain TMCC 8258(T) should be classified as representing a novel species of the genus Olivibacter, for which the name Olivibacter flavus is proposed. The type strain is TMCC 8258(T) (=CGMCC 1.16141 = KCTC 42683). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 38% |
| Other | 3 | 23% |
| Researcher | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 1 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 31% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 23% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 15% |
| Unknown | 1 | 8% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 April 2018.
All research outputs
#17,897,310
of 22,977,819 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Microbiology
#2,046
of 2,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#227,068
of 317,446 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Microbiology
#8
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,977,819 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,792 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 317,446 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 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 61% of its contemporaries.