↓ Skip to main content

Reproductive biology of the threatened Lilium pomponium (Liliaceae), a species endemic to Maritime and Ligurian Alps

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Plant Research, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
Title
Reproductive biology of the threatened Lilium pomponium (Liliaceae), a species endemic to Maritime and Ligurian Alps
Published in
Journal of Plant Research, March 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10265-018-1019-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gabriele Casazza, Angelino Carta, Paolo Giordani, Maria Guerrina, Lorenzo Peruzzi, Luigi Minuto

Abstract

Pollination ecology and breeding system of Lilium pomponium L. were studied, and their effect on the reproductive outcome was assessed. This species has high conservation interest in Europe, because it is included in Annex V of the EU Habitat Directive and it is one out of the five Lilium species listed in IUCN Global Red List. To achieve our aim, the pollen vectors as well as the effect of bagging, emasculation and artificial pollination on reproductive output were studied. The most frequent visitor was the Lepidopteran Gonepteryx rhamnii. In general, reproductive outputs were close to zero for all the self-pollination treatments; however, geitonogamy and facilitated selfing seem slightly more efficient than autogamy, as also confirmed by self-compatibility and autofertility indices. Altogether, our results suggest a self-incompatible outcrossing breeding system, with a poor capacity for selfing. Nevertheless, climate change and anthropic threats might promote a shift toward self-fertilization, even maladaptive, favouring the few individuals able to produce selfed seeds.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 24%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Researcher 2 10%
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Student > Master 2 10%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 5 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 19%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 19%
Environmental Science 3 14%
Computer Science 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 6 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 15 June 2019.
All research outputs
#6,218,950
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Plant Research
#132
of 837 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#110,093
of 331,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Plant Research
#3
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 837 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 331,404 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.