↓ Skip to main content

Metabolite profiling of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) phloem exudate

Overview of attention for article published in Plant Methods, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
Metabolite profiling of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) phloem exudate
Published in
Plant Methods, August 2014
DOI 10.1186/1746-4811-10-27
Pubmed ID
Authors

Palmer LJ, Dias DA, Boughton B, Roessner U, Graham RD, Stangoulis JC, Lachlan Palmer, Daniel Dias, Berin Boughton, Ute Roessner, Robin Graham, James Constantine Stangoulis, Lachlan James Palmer, Daniel Anthony Dias, Robin David Graham, JamesConstantine Roy Stangoulis

Abstract

Biofortification of staple crops with essential micronutrients relies on the efficient, long distance transport of nutrients to the developing seed. The main route of this transport in common wheat (Triticum aestivum) is via the phloem, but due to the reactive nature of some essential micronutrients (specifically Fe and Zn), they need to form ligands with metabolites for transport within the phloem. Current methods available in collecting phloem exudate allows for small volumes (μL or nL) to be collected which limits the breadth of metabolite analysis. We present a technical advance in the measurement of 79 metabolites in as little as 19.5 nL of phloem exudate. This was achieved by using mass spectrometry based, metabolomic techniques.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 3 4%
France 2 3%
United States 2 3%
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 67 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 20 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 24%
Student > Master 8 11%
Professor 6 8%
Other 5 7%
Other 13 17%
Unknown 5 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 49 65%
Chemistry 5 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Social Sciences 4 5%
Engineering 2 3%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 8 11%

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 03 September 2014.
All research outputs
#1,809,146
of 8,071,305 outputs
Outputs from Plant Methods
#86
of 274 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,736
of 185,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Methods
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 8,071,305 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 77th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 274 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 185,059 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.