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 |
A light in the shadow: the use of Lucifer Yellow technique to demonstrate nectar reabsorption
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Plant Methods, June 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1746-4811-9-20 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Poliana Cardoso-Gustavson, João Marcelo Robazzi Bignelli Valente Aguiar, Emerson Ricardo Pansarin, Fábio de Barros |
| Abstract |
Nectar reabsorption is a widely known phenomenon, related to the strategy of resource-recovery and also to maintain the nectar homeostasis at the nectary. The method currently performed to demonstrate nectar being reabsorbed involves the use of radioactive tracers applied to the nectary. Although this method works perfectly, it is complex and requires specific supplies and equipment. Therefore, here we propose an efficient method to obtain a visual demonstration of nectar reabsorption, adapting the use of Lucifer Yellow CH (LYCH), a fluorescent membrane-impermeable dye that can enter the vacuole by endocytosis. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 67% |
| Spain | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 2 | 6% |
| Mexico | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 30 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 27% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 12% |
| Researcher | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 5 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 58% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 3% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 3% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 8 | 24% |
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 14 August 2013.
All research outputs
#14,754,618
of 22,712,476 outputs
Outputs from Plant Methods
#773
of 1,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,420
of 196,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Methods
#8
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,712,476 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 1,075 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 196,823 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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.