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
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Molecular diagnosis and intraspecific genetic variability of root pathogens of arid legumes in Western Rajasthan, India
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Revista de Biología Tropical, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.15517/rbt.v64i4.23331 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ragini Gautam, S.K. Singh, Vinay Sharma |
| Abstract |
The productivity of arid legumes, such as Clusterbean (Cyamopsis tetragonoloba), Cowpea (Vigna unguiculata), Moth bean (Vigna aconitifolia) and Horse gram (Macrotyloma uniflorum), may remain stagnant over decades because of their high susceptibility to root diseases. Besides, there is a limitation on the information about molecular diagnosis and intraspecific genetic variability of root pathogens in arid legumes. To contribute in this field, we assessed a total of 52 isolates from 88 root samples that were found infected with fungal pathogens in Jodhpur, Jaipur and Bikaner Districts of Rajasthan. Diseased roots samples were analyzed following standard microbiological methods for fungus extraction and purification, and for genetic studies. Irrespective of the geographical location from where the diseased samples were collected, all pathogen isolates were clustered in RAPD dendrograms as per their respective genera. Phylogram, based on multiple sequence alignment, revealed that different genera (i.e. Fusarium, Neocosmospora and Syncephalastrum), separated from each other, and species within the same genera, clustered together with their reference sequences with apreciable bootstrap values. Out of 20 representative isolates representing each cluster and all outgroups sequenced, eight were molecularly identified as Neocosmospora vasinfecta, five as Fusarium solani, two as Neocosmospora striata, two as Fusarium acutatum, one as Syncephalastrum monosporum, one as Fusarium oxysporum and one as Fusarium species. The root pathogens of the arid legumes were found neither restricted to a geographical location nor were host specific in nature. Fusarium solani wilt in cowpea and seedling rot in moth bean, F. oxysporum wilt in moth bean, F. acutatum damping off in cowpea and Clusterbean, Fusarium sp. seedling rot in Clusterbean, Neocosmospora striata root rot in cowpea and wilt in Clusterbean and Syncephalastrum monosporum root rot in Clusterbean were molecularly identified as new fungal records as pathogens causing root diseases in arid legumes. |
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% |
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 18 April 2018.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Revista de Biología Tropical
#282
of 383 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#295,399
of 377,876 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista de Biología Tropical
#12
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 383 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 377,876 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.