↓ Skip to main content

Natural genetic variation for morphological and molecular determinants of plant growth and yield

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Experimental Botany, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
109 Mendeley
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.
Title
Natural genetic variation for morphological and molecular determinants of plant growth and yield
Published in
Journal of Experimental Botany, March 2016
DOI 10.1093/jxb/erw124
Pubmed ID
Authors

Adriano Nunes-Nesi, Vitor de Laia Nascimento, Franklin Magnum de Oliveira Silva, Agustin Zsögön, Wagner L. Araújo, Ronan Sulpice

Abstract

The rates of increase in yield of the main commercial crops have been steadily falling in many areas worldwide. This generates concerns because there is a growing demand for plant biomass due to the increasing population. Plant yield should thus be improved in the context of climate change and decreasing natural resources. It is a major challenge which could be tackled by improving and/or altering light-use efficiency, CO2uptake and fixation, primary metabolism, plant architecture and leaf morphology, and developmental plant processes. In this review, we discuss some of the traits which could lead to yield increase, with a focus on how natural genetic variation could be harnessed. Moreover, we provide insights for advancing our understanding of the molecular aspects governing plant growth and yield, and propose future avenues for improvement of crop yield. We also suggest that knowledge accumulated over the last decade in the field of molecular physiology should be integrated into new ideotypes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 108 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 21%
Researcher 17 16%
Student > Master 11 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 5%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 27 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 59 54%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 2%
Unspecified 1 <1%
Environmental Science 1 <1%
Other 5 5%
Unknown 33 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 07 September 2021.
All research outputs
#6,017,817
of 24,037,100 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental Botany
#2,066
of 6,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,857
of 304,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental Botany
#33
of 143 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,037,100 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,919 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% 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 304,832 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 143 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.