↓ Skip to main content

Evolution and Diversity of Plant Cell Walls: From Algae to Flowering Plants

Overview of attention for article published in Annual Review of Plant Biology, June 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters
wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages
q&a
1 Q&A thread

Citations

dimensions_citation
380 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
704 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.
Title
Evolution and Diversity of Plant Cell Walls: From Algae to Flowering Plants
Published in
Annual Review of Plant Biology, June 2011
DOI 10.1146/annurev-arplant-042110-103809
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zoë A. Popper, Gurvan Michel, Cécile Hervé, David S. Domozych, William G.T. Willats, Maria G. Tuohy, Bernard Kloareg, Dagmar B. Stengel

Abstract

All photosynthetic multicellular Eukaryotes, including land plants and algae, have cells that are surrounded by a dynamic, complex, carbohydrate-rich cell wall. The cell wall exerts considerable biological and biomechanical control over individual cells and organisms, thus playing a key role in their environmental interactions. This has resulted in compositional variation that is dependent on developmental stage, cell type, and season. Further variation is evident that has a phylogenetic basis. Plants and algae have a complex phylogenetic history, including acquisition of genes responsible for carbohydrate synthesis and modification through a series of primary (leading to red algae, green algae, and land plants) and secondary (generating brown algae, diatoms, and dinoflagellates) endosymbiotic events. Therefore, organisms that have the shared features of photosynthesis and possession of a cell wall do not form a monophyletic group. Yet they contain some common wall components that can be explained increasingly by genetic and biochemical evidence.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 704 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 14 2%
United Kingdom 6 <1%
Portugal 5 <1%
Germany 4 <1%
Japan 3 <1%
France 3 <1%
Mexico 3 <1%
Brazil 3 <1%
Chile 2 <1%
Other 11 2%
Unknown 650 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 173 25%
Researcher 126 18%
Student > Master 111 16%
Student > Bachelor 52 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 42 6%
Other 132 19%
Unknown 68 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 407 58%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 84 12%
Environmental Science 34 5%
Chemistry 22 3%
Engineering 21 3%
Other 41 6%
Unknown 95 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 28 August 2019.
All research outputs
#3,010,769
of 15,734,993 outputs
Outputs from Annual Review of Plant Biology
#153
of 372 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,854,637
of 14,752,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annual Review of Plant Biology
#153
of 372 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,734,993 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 372 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 14,752,075 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 372 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 58% of its contemporaries.