| Title |
The Nucleo-Mitochondrial Conflict in Cytoplasmic Male Sterilities Revisited
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Genetica, January 2003
|
| DOI | 10.1023/a:1022381016145 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Françoise Budar, Pascal Touzet, Rosine De Paepe |
| Abstract |
Cytoplasmic male sterility (CMS) in plants is a classical example of genomic conflict, opposing maternally-inherited cytoplasmic genes (mitochondrial genes in most cases), which induce male sterility, and nuclear genes, which restore male fertility. In natural populations, this type of sex control leads to gynodioecy, that is, the co-occurrence of female and hermaphroditic individuals within a population. According to theoretical models, two conditions may maintain male sterility in a natural population: (1) female advantage (female plants are reproductively more successful than hermaphrodites on account of their global seed production); (2) the counter-selection of nuclear fertility restorers when the corresponding male-sterility-inducing cytoplasm is lacking. In this review, we re-examine the model of nuclear-mitochondrial conflict in the light of recent experimental results from naturally occurring CMS, alloplasmic CMS (appearing after interspecific crosses resulting from the association of nuclear and cytoplasmic genomes from different species), and CMS plants obtained in the laboratory and carrying mitochondrial mutations. We raise new hypotheses and discuss experimental models that would take physiological interactions between cytoplasmic and nuclear genomes into account. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 129 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 125 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 33 | 26% |
| Researcher | 26 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 8 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 6% |
| Other | 19 | 15% |
| Unknown | 21 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 81 | 63% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 17 | 13% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 1 | <1% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 3 | 2% |
| Unknown | 21 | 16% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 13 September 2019.
All research outputs
#8,533,995
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Genetica
#152
of 706 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,671
of 136,766 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genetica
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 706 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 136,766 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them