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 |
Quantification of the Changes in Potent Wine Odorants as Induced by Bunch Rot (Botrytis cinerea) and Powdery Mildew (Erysiphe necator)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Chemistry, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fchem.2017.00057 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Angela Lopez Pinar, Doris Rauhut, Ernst Ruehl, Andrea Buettner |
| Abstract |
Fungal infections are detrimental for viticulture since they may reduce harvest yield and wine quality. This study aimed to characterize the effects of bunch rot and powdery mildew on wine aroma by quantification of representative aroma compounds using Stable Isotope Dilution Analysis (SIDA). For this purpose, samples affected to a high degree by each fungus were compared with a healthy sample in each case; to this aim, the respective samples were collected and processed applying identical conditions. Thereby, the effects of bunch rot were studied in three different grape varieties: White Riesling, Red Riesling and Gewürztraminer whereas the influence of powdery mildew was studied on the hybrid Gm 8622-3. Analyses revealed that both fungal diseases caused significant changes in the concentration of most target compounds. Thereby, the greatest effects were increases in the concentration of phenylacetic acid, acetic acid and γ-decalactone for both fungi and all grape varieties. Regarding other compounds, however, inconsistent effects of bunch rot were observed for the three varieties studied. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 27 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 19% |
| Professor | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 11% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 8 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 41% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 11% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 4% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 03 August 2017.
All research outputs
#3,229,388
of 22,996,001 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Chemistry
#191
of 6,006 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,536
of 317,591 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Chemistry
#1
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,996,001 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,006 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 317,591 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 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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 96% of its contemporaries.