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 |
Ni tolerance and its distinguished amelioration by chelating agents is reflected in root radius of B. napus cultivars
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Protoplasma, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00709-018-1287-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Humera Nawaz, Stephan Manhalter, Aamir Ali, Muhammad Yasin Ashraf, Ingeborg Lang |
| Abstract |
The negative effect of excess nickel (Ni) on plants is well investigated but there is only little information on its influence on root anatomy and a possible amelioration by chelating agents. In this study, we utilized light microscopy to observe anatomical changes in canola (Brassica napus) roots and investigated the element content by X-ray microanalysis. Ni-tolerant (Con-II) and Ni-sensitive cultivars (Oscar) were selected for this purpose. The plants were treated with 30 ppm NiSO4. Then, citric acid and ethylene-diamine-tetra-acetic acid (EDTA) (alone or in combination) were applied to observe the influence of chelating agents in metal stress amelioration. Ni treatment led to significant swelling of the roots in the Con-II variety as compared to the cultivar Oscar. Application of EDTA reduced the root radius of Con-II plants and this effect for Ni tolerance is discussed. According to X-ray microanalyses, Ni ions were more dispersed in the sensitive cultivar as indicated by metal adsorption to the cell wall. We investigate the hypothesis that an enhanced capacity of binding metals to the cell wall allows the plants to tolerate more heavy metals. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 12 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 33% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 25% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 8% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 8% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 2 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 50% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 2 | 17% |
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 July 2018.
All research outputs
#20,527,576
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from Protoplasma
#750
of 982 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#288,654
of 330,303 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Protoplasma
#10
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 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 982 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. 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 330,303 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 18 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.