↓ Skip to main content

Pre-harvest Methyl Jasmonate Treatment Enhances Cauliflower Chemoprotective Attributes Without a Loss in Postharvest Quality

Overview of attention for article published in Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
Title
Pre-harvest Methyl Jasmonate Treatment Enhances Cauliflower Chemoprotective Attributes Without a Loss in Postharvest Quality
Published in
Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, May 2013
DOI 10.1007/s11130-013-0356-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kang Mo Ku, Jeong-Hee Choi, Mosbah M. Kushad, Elizabeth H. Jeffery, John A. Juvik

Abstract

Methyl jasmonate (MeJA) treatment can significantly increase glucosinolate (GS) concentrations in Brassica vegetables and potentially enhance anticancer bioactivity. Although MeJA treatment may promote ethylene biosynthesis, which can be detrimental to postharvest quality, there are no previous reports of its effect on cauliflower postharvest quality. To address this, cauliflower curds in field plots were sprayed with either 0.1 % Triton X-100 (control) or 500 μM MeJA solutions four days prior to harvest, then stored at 4 °C. Tissue subsamples were collected after 0, 10, 20, and 30 days of postharvest storage and assayed for visual color change, ethylene production, GS concentrations, and extract quinone reductase inductive activity. MeJA treatment increased curd GS concentrations of glucoraphanin, glucobrassicin, and neoglucobrassicin by 1.5, 2.4, and 4.6-fold over controls, respectively. MeJA treated cauliflower showed significantly higher quinone reductase activity, a biomarker for anticancer bioactivity, without reducing visual color and postharvest quality for 10 days at 4 °C storage.

Mendeley readers

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 %
Researcher 6 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 24%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Professor 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 4 16%
Unknown 4 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 44%
Chemistry 3 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 8%
Unspecified 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 23 February 2014.
All research outputs
#4,163,079
of 22,745,803 outputs
Outputs from Plant Foods for Human Nutrition
#163
of 701 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,662
of 192,881 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Foods for Human Nutrition
#3
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,745,803 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 701 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 192,881 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 72% of its contemporaries.