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 |
Perspectives for using genetically encoded fluorescent biosensors in plants
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Plant Science, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpls.2013.00234 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sisse K. Gjetting, Alexander Schulz, Anja T. Fuglsang |
| Abstract |
Genetically encoded fluorescent biosensors have long proven to be excellent tools for quantitative live imaging, but sensor applications in plants have been lacking behind those in mammalian systems with respect to the variety of sensors and tissue types used. How can this be improved, and what can be expected for the use of genetically encoded fluorescent biosensors in plants in the future? In this review, we present a table of successful physiological experiments in plant tissue using fluorescent biosensors, and draw some conclusions about the specific challenges plant cell biologists are faced with and some of the ways they have been overcome so far. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 111 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 2 | 2% |
| France | 2 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Slovenia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 105 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 23% |
| Researcher | 24 | 22% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 14% |
| Professor | 6 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 18 | 16% |
| Unknown | 16 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 58 | 52% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 20 | 18% |
| Chemistry | 6 | 5% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 4 | 4% |
| Unknown | 20 | 18% |
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 12 July 2013.
All research outputs
#20,196,270
of 22,714,025 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#15,851
of 19,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,772
of 280,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#241
of 517 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,714,025 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 19,950 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 280,752 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 517 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.