| Title |
Combinatorial Interactions of Biotic and Abiotic Stresses in Plants and Their Molecular Mechanisms: Systems Biology Approach
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Molecular Biotechnology, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12033-018-0100-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Arun Kumar Dangi, Babita Sharma, Ishu Khangwal, Pratyoosh Shukla |
| Abstract |
Plants are continually facing biotic and abiotic stresses, and hence, they need to respond and adapt to survive. Plant response during multiple and combined biotic and abiotic stresses is highly complex and varied than the individual stress. These stresses resulted alteration of plant behavior through regulating the levels of microRNA, heat shock proteins, epigenetic variations. These variations can cause many adverse effects on the growth and development of the plant. Further, in natural conditions, several abiotic stresses causing factors make the plant more susceptible to pathogens infections and vice-versa. A very intricate and multifaceted interactions of various biomolecules are involved in metabolic pathways that can direct towards a cross-tolerance and improvement of plant's defence system. Systems biology approach plays a significant role in the investigation of these molecular interactions. The valuable information obtained by systems biology will help to develop stress-resistant plant varieties against multiple stresses. Thus, this review aims to decipher various multilevel interactions at the molecular level under combinatorial biotic and abiotic stresses and the role of systems biology to understand these molecular interactions. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 70 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 13% |
| Researcher | 9 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 17% |
| Unknown | 22 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 34 | 49% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 10% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 3% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 1% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 3% |
| Unknown | 23 | 33% |
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 04 July 2018.
All research outputs
#17,981,442
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Biotechnology
#719
of 981 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,881
of 328,981 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Biotechnology
#5
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 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 981 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 328,981 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.