↓ Skip to main content

Tissue-specific clocks in Arabidopsis show asymmetric coupling

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
126 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
294 Mendeley
Title
Tissue-specific clocks in Arabidopsis show asymmetric coupling
Published in
Nature, October 2014
DOI 10.1038/nature13919
Pubmed ID
Authors

Motomu Endo, Hanako Shimizu, Maria A. Nohales, Takashi Araki, Steve A. Kay

Abstract

Many organisms rely on a circadian clock system to adapt to daily and seasonal environmental changes. The mammalian circadian clock consists of a central clock in the suprachiasmatic nucleus that has tightly coupled neurons and synchronizes other clocks in peripheral tissues. Plants also have a circadian clock, but plant circadian clock function has long been assumed to be uncoupled. Only a few studies have been able to show weak, local coupling among cells. Here, by implementing two novel techniques, we have performed a comprehensive tissue-specific analysis of leaf tissues, and show that the vasculature and mesophyll clocks asymmetrically regulate each other in Arabidopsis. The circadian clock in the vasculature has characteristics distinct from other tissues, cycles robustly without environmental cues, and affects circadian clock regulation in other tissues. Furthermore, we found that vasculature-enriched genes that are rhythmically expressed are preferentially expressed in the evening, whereas rhythmic mesophyll-enriched genes tend to be expressed in the morning. Our results set the stage for a deeper understanding of how the vasculature circadian clock in plants regulates key physiological responses such as flowering time.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 48 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 294 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 4 1%
Germany 3 1%
United States 3 1%
Spain 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Philippines 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Other 3 1%
Unknown 273 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 79 27%
Researcher 64 22%
Student > Master 31 11%
Student > Bachelor 28 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 20 7%
Other 72 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 204 69%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 38 13%
Unspecified 23 8%
Environmental Science 7 2%
Neuroscience 4 1%
Other 18 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 45. 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 04 November 2015.
All research outputs
#371,049
of 13,308,245 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#18,731
of 69,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,884
of 233,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#455
of 964 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,308,245 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 69,149 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 75.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 233,065 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 964 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 52% of its contemporaries.