| Title |
Genome-wide identification, expansion, and evolution analysis of homeobox genes and their expression profiles during root development in carrot
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Functional & Integrative Genomics, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10142-018-0624-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Feng Que, Guang-Long Wang, Tong Li, Ya-Hui Wang, Zhi-Sheng Xu, Ai-Sheng Xiong |
| Abstract |
The homeobox gene family, a large family represented by transcription factors, has been implicated in secondary growth, early embryo patterning, and hormone response pathways in plants. However, reports about the information and evolutionary history of the homeobox gene family in carrot are limited. In the present study, a total of 130 homeobox family genes were identified in the carrot genome. Specific codomain and phylogenetic analyses revealed that the genes were classified into 14 subgroups. Whole genome and proximal duplication participated in the homeobox gene family expansion in carrot. Purifying selection also contributed to the evolution of carrot homeobox genes. In Gene Ontology (GO) analysis, most members of the HD-ZIP III and IV subfamilies were found to have a lipid binding (GO:0008289) term. Most HD-ZIP III and IV genes also harbored a steroidogenic acute regulatory protein-related lipid transfer (START) domain. These results suggested that the HD-ZIP III and IV subfamilies might be related to lipid transfer. Transcriptome and quantitative real-time PCR (RT-qPCR) data indicated that members of the WOX and KNOX subfamilies were likely implicated in carrot root development. Our study provided a useful basis for further studies on the complexity and function of the homeobox gene family in carrot. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 26% |
| Researcher | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 13% |
| Professor | 1 | 4% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 7 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 35% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 30% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 7 | 30% |
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 18 June 2018.
All research outputs
#15,536,861
of 23,090,520 outputs
Outputs from Functional & Integrative Genomics
#211
of 522 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,278
of 301,972 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Functional & Integrative Genomics
#5
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,090,520 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 522 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% 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 301,972 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% of its contemporaries.