| Title |
Hypersensitive response-related death
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Plant Molecular Biology, October 2000
|
| DOI | 10.1023/a:1026592509060 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michèle C. Heath |
| Abstract |
The hypersensitive response (HR) of plants resistant to microbial pathogens involves a complex form of programmed cell death (PCD) that differs from developmental PCD in its consistent association with the induction of local and systemic defence responses. Hypersensitive cell death is commonly controlled by direct or indirect interactions between pathogen avirulence gene products and those of plant resistance genes and it can be the result of multiple signalling pathways. Ion fluxes and the generation of reactive oxygen species commonly precede cell death, but a direct involvement of the latter seems to vary with the plant-pathogen combination. Protein synthesis, an intact actin cytoskeleton and salicylic acid also seem necessary for cell death induction. Cytological studies suggest that the actual mode and sequence of dismantling the cell contents varies among plant-parasite systems although there may be a universal involvement of cysteine proteases. It seems likely that cell death within the HR acts more as a signal to the rest of the plant rather than as a direct defence mechanism. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 478 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 9 | 2% |
| Spain | 3 | <1% |
| United States | 3 | <1% |
| Germany | 2 | <1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Rwanda | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 3 | <1% |
| Unknown | 452 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 119 | 25% |
| Researcher | 90 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 66 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 56 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 23 | 5% |
| Other | 60 | 13% |
| Unknown | 64 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 314 | 66% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 63 | 13% |
| Chemistry | 9 | 2% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | <1% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | <1% |
| Other | 11 | 2% |
| Unknown | 73 | 15% |
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 23 December 2017.
All research outputs
#8,535,684
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Plant Molecular Biology
#1,017
of 2,880 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,181
of 38,858 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Molecular Biology
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,880 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 38,858 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.