↓ Skip to main content

The Mitotic Spindle

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 17: The Mitotic Spindle
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (68th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 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.
Chapter title
The Mitotic Spindle
Chapter number 17
Book title
The Mitotic Spindle
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-3542-0_17
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-3540-6, 978-1-4939-3542-0
Authors

Yamada, Moé, Miki, Tomohiro, Goshima, Gohta, Moé Yamada, Tomohiro Miki, Gohta Goshima

Editors

Paul Chang, Ryoma Ohi

Abstract

At first glance, mitosis in plants looks quite different from that in animals. In fact, terrestrial plants have lost the centrosome during evolution, and the mitotic spindle is assembled independently of a strong microtubule organizing center. The phragmoplast is a plant-specific mitotic apparatus formed after anaphase, which expands centrifugally towards the cell cortex. However, the extent to which plant mitosis differs from that of animals at the level of the protein repertoire is uncertain, largely because of the difficulty in the identification and in vivo characterization of mitotic genes of plants. Here, we discuss protocols for mitosis imaging that can be combined with endogenous green fluorescent protein (GFP) tagging or conditional RNA interference (RNAi) in the moss Physcomitrella patens, which is an emergent model plant for cell and developmental biology. This system has potential for use in the high-throughput study of mitosis and other intracellular processes, as is being done with various animal cell lines.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 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 %
Researcher 4 20%
Student > Master 3 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 6 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 25%
Chemistry 1 5%
Unknown 7 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 08 December 2017.
All research outputs
#14,263,483
of 22,873,031 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#4,194
of 13,130 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,076
of 393,675 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#417
of 1,471 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,873,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,130 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 393,675 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,471 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 68% of its contemporaries.