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 |
Using effector targets in resistance breeding
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Microbial Biotechnology, December 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1111/1751-7915.12023 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fleur Gawehns, Ben J C Cornelissen, Frank L W Takken |
| Abstract |
Increasing numbers of infectious crop diseases that are caused by fungi and oomycetes urge the need to develop alternative strategies for resistance breeding. As an alternative for the use of resistance (R) genes, the application of mutant susceptibility (S) genes has been proposed as a potentially more durable type of resistance. Identification of S genes is hampered by their recessive nature. Here we explore the use of pathogen-derived effectors as molecular probes to identify S genes. Effectors manipulate specific host processes thereby contributing to disease. Effector targets might therefore represent S genes. Indeed, the Pseudomonas syringae effector HopZ2 was found to target MLO2, an Arabidopsis thaliana homologue of the barley S gene Mlo. Unfortunately, most effector targets identified so far are not applicable as S genes due to detrimental effects they have on other traits. However, some effector targets such as Mlo are successfully used, and with the increase in numbers of effector targets being identified, the numbers of S genes that can be used in resistance breeding will rise as well. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 194 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 2 | 1% |
| India | 2 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 184 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 48 | 25% |
| Researcher | 31 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 22 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 20 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 17 | 9% |
| Other | 30 | 15% |
| Unknown | 26 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 138 | 71% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 22 | 11% |
| Engineering | 3 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 1% |
| Chemistry | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 27 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 19 May 2013.
All research outputs
#16,048,009
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Microbial Biotechnology
#1,104
of 1,548 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,329
of 288,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Microbial Biotechnology
#10
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,548 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 288,792 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.