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 |
What lies beneath: belowground defense strategies in plants
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Trends in Plant Science, October 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.tplants.2014.09.007 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Barbara De Coninck, Pieter Timmermans, Christine Vos, Bruno P.A. Cammue, Kemal Kazan |
| Abstract |
Diseases caused by soil-borne pathogens result worldwide in significant yield losses in economically important crops. In contrast to foliar diseases, relatively little is known about the nature of root defenses against these pathogens. This review summarizes the current knowledge on root infection strategies, root-specific preformed barriers, pathogen recognition, and defense signaling. Studies reviewed here suggest that many commonalities as well as differences exist in defense strategies employed by roots and foliar tissues during pathogen attack. Importantly, in addition to pathogens, plant roots interact with a plethora of non-pathogenic and symbiotic microorganisms. Therefore, a good understanding of how plant roots interact with the microbiome would be particularly important to engineer resistance to root pathogens without negatively altering root-beneficial microbe interactions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 | 20% |
| United States | 2 | 20% |
| Ireland | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 5 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 90% |
| Scientists | 1 | 10% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 442 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 4 | <1% |
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Zimbabwe | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | <1% |
| Unknown | 425 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 96 | 22% |
| Researcher | 78 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 68 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 42 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 34 | 8% |
| Other | 66 | 15% |
| Unknown | 58 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 258 | 58% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 52 | 12% |
| Environmental Science | 21 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 14 | 3% |
| Engineering | 7 | 2% |
| Other | 22 | 5% |
| Unknown | 68 | 15% |
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 November 2014.
All research outputs
#5,211,074
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Trends in Plant Science
#1,021
of 2,394 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,837
of 267,589 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Trends in Plant Science
#9
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,394 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 267,589 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 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 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 60% of its contemporaries.