↓ Skip to main content

The Microbe-Free Plant: Fact or Artifact?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
300 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
511 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
The Microbe-Free Plant: Fact or Artifact?
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, January 2011
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2011.00100
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laila P. Partida-Martínez, Martin Heil

Abstract

Plant-microbe interactions are ubiquitous. Plants are threatened by pathogens, but they are even more commonly engaged in neutral or mutualistic interactions with microbes: belowground microbial plant associates are mycorrhizal fungi, Rhizobia, and plant-growth promoting rhizosphere bacteria, aboveground plant parts are colonized by internally living bacteria and fungi (endophytes) and by microbes in the phyllosphere (epiphytes). We emphasize here that a completely microbe-free plant is an exotic exception rather than the biologically relevant rule. The complex interplay of such microbial communities with the host-plant affects multiple vital parameters such as plant nutrition, growth rate, resistance to biotic and abiotic stressors, and plant survival and distribution. The mechanisms involved reach from direct ones such as nutrient acquisition, the production of plant hormones, or direct antibiosis, to indirect ones that are mediated by effects on host resistance genes or via interactions at higher trophic levels. Plant-associated microbes are heterotrophic and cause costs to their host plant, whereas the benefits depend on the current environment. Thus, the outcome of the interaction for the plant host is highly context dependent. We argue that considering the microbe-free plant as the "normal" or control stage significantly impairs research into important phenomena such as (1) phenotypic and epigenetic plasticity, (2) the "normal" ecological outcome of a given interaction, and (3) the evolution of plants. For the future, we suggest cultivation-independent screening methods using direct PCR from plant tissue of more than one fungal and bacterial gene to collect data on the true microbial diversity in wild plants. The patterns found could be correlated to host species and environmental conditions, in order to formulate testable hypotheses on the biological roles of plant endophytes in nature. Experimental approaches should compare different host-endophyte combinations under various relevant environmental conditions and study at the genetic, epigenetic, transcriptional, and physiological level the parameters that cause the interaction to shift along the mutualism-parasitism continuum.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 511 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 11 2%
Mexico 9 2%
Canada 3 <1%
Argentina 2 <1%
India 2 <1%
Uruguay 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Other 9 2%
Unknown 469 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 113 22%
Researcher 80 16%
Student > Master 76 15%
Student > Bachelor 48 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 39 8%
Other 76 15%
Unknown 79 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 307 60%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 43 8%
Environmental Science 32 6%
Chemistry 8 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 1%
Other 17 3%
Unknown 98 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. 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 04 April 2017.
All research outputs
#923,820
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#240
of 19,843 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,567
of 180,328 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#1
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 19,843 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 180,328 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 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 98% of its contemporaries.