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 |
Filter strip as a method of choice for apoplastic fluid extraction from maize roots
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Plant Science, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.plantsci.2014.03.009 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jelena J. Dragišić Maksimović, Branka D. Živanović, Vuk M. Maksimović, Miloš D. Mojović, Miroslav T. Nikolic, Željko B. Vučinić |
| Abstract |
Apoplastic fluid was extracted from maize (Zea mays L.) roots using two procedures: collection from the surface of intact plant roots by filter paper strips (AF) or vacuum infiltration and/or centrifugation from excised root segments (AWF). The content of cytoplasmic marker (glucose-6-phosphate, G-6-P) and antioxidative components (enzymes, organic acids, phenolics, sugars, ROS) were compared in the extracts. The results obtained demonstrate that AF was completely free of G-6-P, as opposed to AWF where the cytoplasmic constituent was detected even at mildest centrifugation (200×g). Isoelectric focusing of POD and SOD shows the presence of cytoplasmic isoforms in AWF, and HPLC of sugars and phenolics a much more complex composition of AWF, due to cytoplasmic contamination. Organic acid composition differed in the two extracts, much higher concentrations of malic acid being registered in AF, while oxalic acid due to intracellular contamination being present only in AWF. EPR spectroscopy of DEPMPO spin trap in the extracts showed persistent generation of hydroxyl radical adduct in AF. The results obtained argue in favor of the filter strip method for the root apoplastic fluid extraction, avoiding the problems of cytoplasmic contamination and dilution and enabling concentration measurements in minute regions of the root. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nigeria | 1 | 3% |
| Argentina | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 38 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 25% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 13% |
| Researcher | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 13% |
| Unknown | 10 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 48% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 8% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 10 | 25% |
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 29 April 2014.
All research outputs
#16,722,913
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Plant Science
#1,692
of 2,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#136,791
of 235,723 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Science
#11
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,773 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 235,723 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.