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 |
Genetic analysis of Japanese and American specimens of Scirpus hattorianus suggests its introduction from North America
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Plant Research, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10265-017-0976-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kohei Satoh, Kohtaroh Shutoh, Takahide Kurosawa, Eisuke Hayasaka, Shingo Kaneko |
| Abstract |
Scirpus hattorianus is a possible alien species in Japan, and a clarification of its unclear taxonomy is required to reveal its origin. It is not known whether the plants initially described from Japan represent the same species distributed in North America. To clarify the origin of the species, we attempted to sequence old specimens collected about 80 years ago using newly designed primer pairs specific for short sequences, including the variable sites. Chloroplast sequences of ndhF were compared among Japanese and North American S. hattorianus, and the closely related species, S. atrovirens, S. flaccidifolius, and S. georgianus. We succeeded in sequencing all samples, and two haplotypes were detected in S. hattorianus: one was unique to the species and the other, detected from specimens potentially collected from the same population as the types, was shared by both North American S. hattorianus and two closely related species, S. atrovirens and S. flaccidifolius. Our results suggest that Japanese S. hattorianus is an alien species that was introduced from North America at least twice. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 23 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 10 | 43% |
| Thailand | 1 | 4% |
| Côte d'Ivoire | 1 | 4% |
| Nepal | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 10 | 43% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 22 | 96% |
| Scientists | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 1 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 February 2021.
All research outputs
#2,298,745
of 25,653,515 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Plant Research
#53
of 1,175 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,234
of 324,262 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Plant Research
#1
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,653,515 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,175 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 324,262 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.