↓ Skip to main content

A novel rejuvenation approach to induce endohormones and improve rhizogenesis in mature Juglans tree

Overview of attention for article published in Plant Methods, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 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
A novel rejuvenation approach to induce endohormones and improve rhizogenesis in mature Juglans tree
Published in
Plant Methods, February 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13007-018-0280-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hao Liu, Ying Gao, Xiaobo Song, Qingguo Ma, Junpei Zhang, Dong Pei

Abstract

Juglans is a difficult-to-root tree. In the present study, we successfully rejuvenated stock plants by grafting and then burying them horizontally. Rooting rates of rejuvenated shoots were 98.1% 20 days after cutting. We recorded spatial and temporal variation in endogenous indole-3-acetic acid (IAA), abscisic acid (ABA), gibberellin A3(GA3) and zeatin-riboside (ZR) under root induction. The four types of endohormones were mainly confined to the phloem sieve and companion cells (S&Cs) at the base of either rejuvenated or mature soft shoots. IAA and ABA levels were higher in rejuvenated shoots than in mature shoots, whereas the opposite was true for GA3and ZR. During rooting induction, GA3was the first hormone to be observed outside phloem S&Cs, followed by IAA, ABA and ZR. In rejuvenating soft shoots, IAA accumulated in the cross-sectional areas of the cambium and phloem, where root primordia were evident. The improvement in the rooting ability that was evident after rejuvenation most likely results a transformation of the plant to a juvenile form, from elevated IAA levels in phloem S&Cs and from a promotion of all four endohormones outside phloem S&Cs, in particular, from an accumulation of IAA in the cross-sectional areas of the cambium and phloem.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 33%
Professor 3 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 14%
Student > Master 1 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 5 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 52%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 5%
Unknown 7 33%
Attention Score in Context

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 09 February 2018.
All research outputs
#18,349,015
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Plant Methods
#937
of 1,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#315,071
of 445,315 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Methods
#24
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,120 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 445,315 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.