↓ Skip to main content

The dynamic interplay of plasma membrane domains and cortical microtubules in secondary cell wall patterning

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
46 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.
Title
The dynamic interplay of plasma membrane domains and cortical microtubules in secondary cell wall patterning
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2013.00511
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yoshihisa Oda, Hiroo Fukuda

Abstract

Patterning of the cellulosic cell wall underlies the shape and function of plant cells. The cortical microtubule array plays a central role in the regulation of cell wall patterns. However, the regulatory mechanisms by which secondary cell wall patterns are established through cortical microtubules remain to be fully determined. Our recent study in xylem vessel cells revealed that a mutual inhibitory interaction between cortical microtubules and distinct plasma membrane domains leads to distinctive patterning in secondary cell walls. Our research revealed that the recycling of active and inactive ROP proteins by a specific GAP and GEF pair establishes distinct de novo plasma membrane domains. Active ROP recruits a plant-specific microtubule-associated protein, MIDD1, which mediates the mutual interaction between cortical microtubules and plasma membrane domains. In this mini review, we summarize recent research regarding secondary wall patterning, with a focus on the emerging interplay between plasma membrane domains and cortical microtubules through MIDD1 and ROP.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 44 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 26%
Researcher 7 15%
Professor 3 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 13 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 20%
Physics and Astronomy 3 7%
Computer Science 1 2%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 13 28%
Attention Score in Context

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 17 December 2013.
All research outputs
#20,213,623
of 22,736,112 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#15,909
of 20,007 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,822
of 280,808 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#241
of 517 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,736,112 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 20,007 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 280,808 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.