↓ Skip to main content

Strigolactone versus gibberellin signaling: reemerging concepts?

Overview of attention for article published in Planta, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
Title
Strigolactone versus gibberellin signaling: reemerging concepts?
Published in
Planta, February 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00425-016-2478-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eva-Sophie Wallner, Vadir López-Salmerón, Thomas Greb

Abstract

In this review, we compare knowledge about the recently discovered strigolactone signaling pathway and the well established gibberellin signaling pathway to identify gaps of knowledge and putative research directions in strigolactone biology. Communication between and inside cells is integral for the vitality of living organisms. Hormonal signaling cascades form a large part of this communication and an understanding of both their complexity and interactive nature is only beginning to emerge. In plants, the strigolactone (SL) signaling pathway is the most recent addition to the classically acting group of hormones and, although fundamental insights have been made, knowledge about the nature and impact of SL signaling is still cursory. This narrow understanding is in spite of the fact that SLs influence a specific spectrum of processes, which includes shoot branching and root system architecture in response, partly, to environmental stimuli. This makes these hormones ideal tools for understanding the coordination of plant growth processes, mechanisms of long-distance communication and developmental plasticity. Here, we summarize current knowledge about SL signaling and employ the well-characterized gibberellin (GA) signaling pathway as a scaffold to highlight emerging features as well as gaps in our knowledge in this context. GA signaling is particularly suitable for this comparison because both signaling cascades share key features of hormone perception and of immediate downstream events. Therefore, our comparative view demonstrates the possible level of complexity and regulatory interfaces of SL signaling.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 84 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 22%
Researcher 14 16%
Student > Bachelor 12 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 11%
Student > Master 5 6%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 15 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 44 52%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 18%
Chemistry 3 4%
Environmental Science 1 1%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 18 21%
Attention Score in Context

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 27 May 2016.
All research outputs
#20,330,976
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from Planta
#2,377
of 2,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,331
of 298,765 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Planta
#27
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,720 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 298,765 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.