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 |
Development of a GFP expression vector for Cucurbit chlorotic yellows virus
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Virology Journal, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12985-018-1004-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ying Wei, Xiaoyu Han, Zhenyue Wang, Qinsheng Gu, Honglian Li, Linlin Chen, Bingjian Sun, Yan Shi |
| Abstract |
Cucurbit chlorotic yellows virus (CCYV), a bipartite crinivirus, causes chlorotic leaf spots and yellowing symptoms on cucurbit leaves. We previously developed an infectious clone of CCYV. Limited work has been conducted on the construction of a crinivirus green fluorescence protein (GFP) expression vector to date. We constructed a CCYV GFP expression vector using the "add a gene" strategy based on CCYV RNA2 cDNA constrcut. Three resultant clones, pCCYVGFPSGC, pCCYVGFPCGC, and pCCYVGFPCGS, were constructed with different promoters used to initiate GFP and CP expression. At 25 dpi GFP fluorescence was detectable not only in leaf veins but also in the surrounding cells. pCCYVGFPCGC-infected cucumber leaves exhibited cell spread at 25 dpi, whereas pCCYVGFPSGC and pCCYVGFPCGS were mainly found in single cells. Further observation of pCCYVGFPCGC GFP expression at 30 dpi, 40 dpi, and 50 dpi showed phloem-limited localization in the systemic leaves. We developed of a CCYV GFP expression vector that will be useful for further study of CCYV movement in cucurbits. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 15% |
| Researcher | 3 | 15% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 40% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 45% |
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 24 May 2018.
All research outputs
#18,624,695
of 23,072,295 outputs
Outputs from Virology Journal
#2,458
of 3,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,381
of 330,346 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virology Journal
#29
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,072,295 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,065 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.8. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 330,346 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.