You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Bud Rot Caused by Phytophthora palmivora: A Destructive Emerging Disease of Oil Palm.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Phytopathology, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1094/phyto-09-15-0243-rvw |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
G A Torres, G A Sarria, G Martinez, F Varon, A Drenth, D I Guest |
| Abstract |
Oomycetes from the genus Phytophthora are among the most important plant pathogens in agriculture. Epidemics caused by P. infestans precipitated the great Irish famine and had a major impact on society and human history. In the tropics P. palmivora is a pathogen of many plant species (Erwin and Ribeiro, 1996) including cacao (Theobroma cacao), citrus (Citrus sp), durian (Durio zibethines), jackfruit (Artrocarpus heterophyllus), rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) and several palm species including coconut (Cocos nucifera), and the African oil palm (Elaeis guineensis) as determined recently. The first localized epidemics of bud rot in oil palm in Colombia were reported in 1964. However, recent epidemics of bud rot have destroyed more than 70,000 ha of oil palm in the Western and Central oil palm growing regions of Colombia. The agricultural, social and economic implications of these outbreaks has been significant in Colombia. Identification of the pathogen after 100 years of investigating the disease in the world enabled further understanding of infection, expression of a range of symptoms and epidemiology of the disease. This review examines the identification of P. palmivora as the cause of bud rot in Colombia, its epidemiology, and discusses the importance of P. palmivora as a major threat to oil palm plantings globally. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 221 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 220 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 53 | 24% |
| Student > Bachelor | 29 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 26 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 7% |
| Other | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 26 | 12% |
| Unknown | 58 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 90 | 41% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 21 | 10% |
| Engineering | 13 | 6% |
| Environmental Science | 4 | 2% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 2% |
| Other | 23 | 10% |
| Unknown | 66 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 May 2021.
All research outputs
#2,722,069
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Phytopathology
#193
of 3,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,455
of 314,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Phytopathology
#3
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,017 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% 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 314,938 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.