↓ Skip to main content

Pico Gauges for Minimally Invasive Intracellular Hydrostatic Pressure Measurements

Overview of attention for article published in Plant Physiology, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
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.
Article details
Title
Pico Gauges for Minimally Invasive Intracellular Hydrostatic Pressure Measurements
Published in
Plant Physiology, September 2014
DOI 10.1104/pp.114.245746
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Intracellular pressure has a multitude of functions in cells surrounded by a cell wall or similar matrix in all kingdoms of life. The functions include cell growth, nastic movements, and penetration of tissue by parasites. The precise measurement of intracellular pressure in the majority of cells, however, remains difficult or impossible due to their small size and/or sensitivity to manipulation. Here, we report on a method that allows precise measurements in basically any cell type over all ranges of pressure. It is based on the compression of nanoliter and picoliter volumes of oil entrapped in the tip of microcapillaries, which we call pico gauges. The production of pico gauges can be accomplished with standard laboratory equipment, and measurements are comparably easy to conduct. Example pressure measurements are performed on cells that are difficult or impossible to measure with other methods.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 60 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 21%
Professor 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 13 21%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 34%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 13%
Physics and Astronomy 5 8%
Engineering 5 8%
Chemical Engineering 1 2%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 15 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 21 January 2020.
All research outputs
#6,276,254
of 28,812,439 outputs
Outputs from Plant Physiology
#3,980
of 13,470 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#58,520
of 264,372 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Physiology
#20
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,812,439 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,470 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its peers.
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 264,372 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.