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 |
Genomes and virulence difference between two physiological races of Phytophthora nicotianae
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Giga Science, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13742-016-0108-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hui Liu, Xiao Ma, Haiqin Yu, Dunhuang Fang, Yongping Li, Xiao Wang, Wen Wang, Yang Dong, Bingguang Xiao |
| Abstract |
Black shank is a severe plant disease caused by the soil-borne pathogen Phytophthora nicotianae. Two physiological races of P. nicotianae, races 0 and 1, are predominantly observed in cultivated tobacco fields around the world. Race 0 has been reported to be more aggressive, having a shorter incubation period, and causing worse root rot symptoms, while race 1 causes more severe necrosis. The molecular mechanisms underlying the difference in virulence between race 0 and 1 remain elusive. We assembled and annotated the genomes of P. nicotianae races 0 and 1, which were obtained by a combination of PacBio single-molecular real-time sequencing and second-generation sequencing (both HiSeq and MiSeq platforms). Gene family analysis revealed a highly expanded ATP-binding cassette transporter gene family in P. nicotianae. Specifically, more RxLR effector genes were found in the genome of race 0 than in that of race 1. In addition, RxLR effector genes were found to be mainly distributed in gene-sparse, repeat-rich regions of the P. nicotianae genome. These results provide not only high quality reference genomes of P. nicotianae, but also insights into the infection mechanisms of P. nicotianae and its co-evolution with the host plant. They also reveal insights into the difference in virulence between the two physiological races. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| China | 2 | 40% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 51 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 9 | 17% |
| Unknown | 16 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 20 | 38% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 17% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 18 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 25 November 2016.
All research outputs
#2,764,289
of 25,593,129 outputs
Outputs from Giga Science
#552
of 1,174 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,392
of 406,684 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Giga Science
#9
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,593,129 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,174 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% 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 406,684 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.