| Title |
Endophytic fungi isolated from medicinal plants: future prospects of bioactive natural products from Tabebuia/Handroanthus endophytes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, September 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00253-018-9344-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Omar Cabezas Gómez, Jaine Honorata Hortolan Luiz |
| Abstract |
Medicinal plants are a rich source of natural products used to treat many diseases; therefore, they are the basis for a new drug discovery. Plants are capable of generating different bioactive secondary metabolites, but a large amount of botanical material is often necessary to obtain small amounts of the target substance. Nowadays, many medicinal plants are becoming rather scarce. For this reason, it is important to point out the interactions between endophytic microorganisms and the host plant, because endophytes are able to produce highly diverse compounds, including those from host plants that have important biological activities. Thence, this review aims at presenting the richness in bioactive compounds of the medicinal plants from Tabebuia and Handroanthus genera, as well as important aspects about endophyte-plant interactions, with emphasis on the production of bioactive compounds by endophytic fungi, which has been isolated from various medicinal plants for such a purpose. Furthermore, bio-prospection of natural products synthesized by endophytes isolated from the aforementioned genera used in traditional medicine could be used to treat illnesses. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 128 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 128 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 13% |
| Researcher | 15 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 9% |
| Professor | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 16 | 13% |
| Unknown | 51 | 40% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 24 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 19 | 15% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 6 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 4 | 3% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 14 | 11% |
| Unknown | 58 | 45% |
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 12 September 2018.
All research outputs
#19,611,252
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
#6,478
of 8,034 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#263,277
of 340,808 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology
#83
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,034 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 340,808 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.