| Title |
Induction and origin of adventitious shoots from chimeras of Brassica juncea and Brassica oleracea
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Plant Cell Reports, July 2007
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00299-007-0398-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xue-Yun Zhu, Man Zhao, Sheng Ma, Ya-Ming Ge, Ming-Fang Zhang, Li-Ping Chen |
| Abstract |
The chimeras between tuber mustard (Brassica juncea) and red cabbage (B. oleracea) were artificially synthesized in our previous study. Adventitious shoots were induced from nodal segments and leaf discs of TCC (LI-LII-LIII, LI -the outmost layer of shoot apical meristem; LII -the middle layer; LIII -the innermost layer. T = Tuber mustard, C = Red cabbage) chimeras. The origin of the shoots was analyzed by histology and molecular biology. As a result, the frequency of adventitious shoot induction rose with the increase of BA in MS medium in the area of the nodes. However, there was no different induction frequency of adventitious shoots from nodal segment bases in media with different BA concentrations. Most adventitious shoots (clustered shoots) arising from the node area were TTT (Tuber mustard- Tuber mustard- Tuber mustard) and only 4 shoots were chimeras, which indicated that more shoots originated from LI than from LII and LIII. All shoots from nodal segment bases were CCC (Red cabbage-Red cabbage- Red cabbage), indicating that the shoots originated from LII or LII and LIII. There were significant differences in the regeneration rate in the margin of the leaf discs among the three combinations of BA and NAA. Most adventitious shoots from the margin of leaf discs were CCC but 2 out of 70 were chimeras, which indicated that more shoots originated from LII or LII and LIII than from LI. All chimeras obtained by regeneration were different from the original explant donor in type in the present study. The origin of the adventitious shoots varied with the site of origin on the donor plant, and could be multicellular and multihistogenic. |
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 > Master | 4 | 31% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 15% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 8% |
| Researcher | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 3 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 62% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 8% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 3 | 23% |
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 19 July 2021.
All research outputs
#7,451,942
of 22,782,096 outputs
Outputs from Plant Cell Reports
#771
of 2,182 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,487
of 67,943 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Cell Reports
#5
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,782,096 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,182 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 67,943 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.