↓ Skip to main content

Morphological and genetic differences between Coptis japonica var. anemonifolia H. Ohba and Coptis japonica var. major Satake in Hokuriku area

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Natural Medicines, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
5 Mendeley
Title
Morphological and genetic differences between Coptis japonica var. anemonifolia H. Ohba and Coptis japonica var. major Satake in Hokuriku area
Published in
Journal of Natural Medicines, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11418-018-1179-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Masashi Kitamura, Hirokazu Ando, Yohei Sasaki

Abstract

Coptis japonica is widely distributed in Japan, and its dried rhizome is a source of the domestic herbal medicine Coptidis Rhizoma ( Oren). There are three varieties of C. japonica, two of which, namely, C. japonica var. anemonifolia and C. japonica var. major, are important as sources of traditional medicines. Coptis japonica var. anemonifolia and C. japonica var. major are distinguishable on the basis of their ternate or biternate compound leaves, respectively. In the Hokuriku area, where both C. japonica var. anemonifolia and C. japonica var. major grow naturally, some individual plants cannot be identified unambiguously on the basis of leaf morphology because changes in leaf morphology may occur due to intra-variety variation or crossbreeding between the two varieties. In addition, genetic differences between the two varieties have remained unclear. In this study, we employed new genetic and morphological classification approaches to discriminate between the two varieties. Based on the single nucleotide polymorphisms of the tetrahydroberberine oxidase gene, we found four conserved SNPs between the two varieties and were able to classify C. japonica into two varieties and crossbreeds. Furthermore, we introduced a new leaf type index based on the overall degree of leaflet dissection calculated by surface area of a leaflet and length of leaflet margin and petiolule. Using our new index we were able to discriminate between the two varieties and their crossbreeds more accurately than is possible with the conventional discrimination method. Our genetic and morphological classification methods may be used as novel benchmarks to discriminate between the two varieties and their crossbreeds.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 40%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 20%
Unknown 2 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 20%
Unknown 2 40%
Attention Score in Context

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 19 May 2018.
All research outputs
#17,930,799
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Natural Medicines
#284
of 533 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#313,853
of 445,207 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Natural Medicines
#22
of 34 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 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 533 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 445,207 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 34 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.