| Title |
Effects of grafting on the cadmium accumulation characteristics of the potential Cd-hyperaccumulator Solanum photeinocarpum
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10661-015-5084-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lijin Lin, Daiyu Yang, Xun Wang, Ming’an Liao, Zhihui Wang, Xiulan Lv, Fuyi Tang, Dong Liang, Hui Xia, Yunsong Lai, Yi Tang |
| Abstract |
The effects of grafting on the cadmium (Cd) accumulation characteristics of the potential Cd-hyperaccumulator Solanum photeinocarpum were studied under Cd stress in our experiment. Four treatments were used in the experiment: ungrafted (UG), self-rooted grafting by the same S. photeinocarpum seedling (SG), self-rooted grafting by two different development stages of S. photeinocarpum seedlings (DG), and grafting on the rootstock of wild potato (PG). SG and DG decreased the root, scion stem, leaf, whole shoot, and whole plant biomasses compared with UG, but increased the rootstock stem biomass, while only PG increased the root and whole plant biomasses. SG and DG increased the Cd contents in the different organs of S. photeinocarpum compared with UG, while PG decreased the Cd content compared with UG. The Cd extraction by the whole plant of S. photeinocarpum was ranked as DG > SG > UG > PG. Additionally, the antioxidant enzyme activities in SG and DG were enhanced compared with UG, while that of PG was reduced compared with UG. The grafting increased the DNA methylation levels and changed the methylation patterns of S. photeinocarpum compared with UG. Therefore, SG and DG can increase the Cd accumulation in S. photeinocarpum, which can be used for the phytoremediation of Cd-contaminated soil. |
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 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 13 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 23% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 15% |
| Researcher | 2 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 15% |
| Professor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 15% |
| Unknown | 1 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 69% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 8% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 1 | 8% |
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 25 June 2016.
All research outputs
#18,699,725
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#1,797
of 2,748 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#274,553
of 400,114 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
#23
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,748 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 400,114 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 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 55% of its contemporaries.