↓ Skip to main content

Metabolic efficiency underpins performance trade-offs in growth of Arabidopsis thaliana

Overview of attention for article published in Nature Communications, March 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 Mendeley
Title
Metabolic efficiency underpins performance trade-offs in growth of Arabidopsis thaliana
Published in
Nature Communications, March 2014
DOI 10.1038/ncomms4537
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sabrina Kleessen, Roosa Laitinen, Corina M. Fusari, Carla Antonio, Ronan Sulpice, Alisdair R. Fernie, Mark Stitt, Zoran Nikoloski

Abstract

Growth often involves a trade-off between the performance of contending tasks; metabolic plasticity can play an important role. Here we grow 97 Arabidopsis thaliana accessions in three conditions with a differing supply of carbon and nitrogen and identify a trade-off between two tasks required for rosette growth: increasing the physical size and increasing the protein concentration. We employ the Pareto performance frontier concept to rank accessions based on their multitask performance; only a few accessions achieve a good trade-off under all three growth conditions. We determine metabolic efficiency in each accession and condition by using metabolite levels and activities of enzymes involved in growth and protein synthesis. We demonstrate that accessions with high metabolic efficiency lie closer to the performance frontier and show increased metabolic plasticity. We illustrate how public domain data can be used to search for additional contending tasks, which may underlie the sub-optimality in some accessions.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 3%
Brazil 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Singapore 1 3%
Unknown 36 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 25%
Researcher 10 25%
Student > Master 5 13%
Professor 3 8%
Unspecified 3 8%
Other 9 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 53%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 23%
Unspecified 4 10%
Engineering 3 8%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 5%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 02 April 2014.
All research outputs
#4,607,011
of 6,229,690 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#8,678
of 9,707 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,982
of 133,108 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#376
of 415 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 6,229,690 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,707 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 37.7. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% 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 133,108 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 415 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.