↓ Skip to main content

Complete genome sequence of Pseudomonas fluorescens strain PICF7, an indigenous root endophyte from olive (Olea europaea L.) and effective biocontrol agent against Verticillium dahliae

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Microbiome, February 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
Title
Complete genome sequence of Pseudomonas fluorescens strain PICF7, an indigenous root endophyte from olive (Olea europaea L.) and effective biocontrol agent against Verticillium dahliae
Published in
Environmental Microbiome, February 2015
DOI 10.1186/1944-3277-10-10
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pedro Manuel Martínez-García, David Ruano-Rosa, Elisabetta Schilirò, Pilar Prieto, Cayo Ramos, Pablo Rodríguez-Palenzuela, Jesús Mercado-Blanco

Abstract

Pseudomonas fluorescens strain PICF7 is a native endophyte of olive roots. Previous studies have shown this motile, Gram-negative, non-sporulating bacterium is an effective biocontrol agent against the soil-borne fungus Verticillium dahliae, the causal agent of one of the most devastating diseases for olive (Olea europaea L.) cultivation. Here, we announce and describe the complete genome sequence of Pseudomonas fluorescens strain PICF7 consisting of a circular chromosome of 6,136,735 bp that encodes 5,567 protein-coding genes and 88 RNA-only encoding genes. Genome analysis revealed genes predicting factors such as secretion systems, siderophores, detoxifying compounds or volatile components. Further analysis of the genome sequence of PICF7 will help in gaining insights into biocontrol and endophytism.

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 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 93 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 19%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Other 6 6%
Other 14 15%
Unknown 18 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 40 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 15%
Environmental Science 5 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 2%
Other 4 4%
Unknown 25 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 17 February 2015.
All research outputs
#15,169,543
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Microbiome
#425
of 786 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,179
of 360,806 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Microbiome
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 786 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 360,806 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 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.