↓ Skip to main content

Polyploidy: Pitfalls and paths to a paradigm

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Botany, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Readers on

mendeley
316 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Polyploidy: Pitfalls and paths to a paradigm
Published in
American Journal of Botany, May 2016
DOI 10.3732/ajb.1500501
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Investigators have long searched for a polyploidy paradigm-rules or principles that might be common following polyploidization (whole-genome duplication, WGD). Here we attempt to integrate what is known across the more thoroughly investigated polyploid systems on topics ranging from genetics to ecology. We found that while certain rules may govern gene retention and loss, systems vary in the prevalence of gene silencing vs. homeolog loss, chromosomal change, the presence of a dominant genome (in allopolyploids), and the relative importance of hybridization vs. genome doubling per se. In some lineages, aspects of polyploidization are repeated across multiple origins, but in other species multiple origins behave more stochastically in terms of genetic and phenotypic change. Our investigation also reveals that the path to synthesis is hindered by numerous gaps in our knowledge of even the best-known systems. Particularly concerning is the absence of linkage between genotype and phenotype. Moreover, most recent studies have focused on the genetic and genomic attributes of polyploidy, but rarely is there an ecological or physiological context. To promote a path to a polyploidy paradigm (or paradigms), we propose a major community goal over the next 10-20 yr to fill the gaps in our knowledge of well-studied polyploids. Before a meaningful synthesis is possible, more complete data sets are needed for comparison-systems that include comparable genetic, genomic, chromosomal, proteomic, as well as morphological, physiological, and ecological data. Also needed are more natural evolutionary model systems, as most of what we know about polyploidy continues to come from a few crop and genetic models, systems that often lack the ecological context inherent in natural systems and necessary for understanding the drivers of biodiversity.

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.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 316 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 %
United States 3 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 309 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 77 24%
Researcher 47 15%
Student > Master 33 10%
Student > Bachelor 26 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 6%
Other 49 16%
Unknown 65 21%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 170 54%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 46 15%
Environmental Science 8 3%
Engineering 3 <1%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 <1%
Other 13 4%
Unknown 73 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 12 October 2017.
All research outputs
#8,295,119
of 28,012,507 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Botany
#1,637
of 4,685 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,043
of 320,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Botany
#21
of 49 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,012,507 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,685 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% 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 320,421 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 49 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 57% of its contemporaries.