↓ Skip to main content

A simple method suitable to study de novo root organogenesis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
87 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
131 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
A simple method suitable to study de novo root organogenesis
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, May 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2014.00208
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaodong Chen, Yuliang Qu, Lihong Sheng, Jingchun Liu, Hai Huang, Lin Xu

Abstract

De novo root organogenesis is the process in which adventitious roots regenerate from detached or wounded plant tissues or organs. In tissue culture, appropriate types and concentrations of plant hormones in the medium are critical for inducing adventitious roots. However, in natural conditions, regeneration from detached organs is likely to rely on endogenous hormones. To investigate the actions of endogenous hormones and the molecular mechanisms guiding de novo root organogenesis, we developed a simple method to imitate natural conditions for adventitious root formation by culturing Arabidopsis thaliana leaf explants on B5 medium without additive hormones. Here we show that the ability of the leaf explants to regenerate roots depends on the age of the leaf and on certain nutrients in the medium. Based on these observations, we provide examples of how this method can be used in different situations, and how it can be optimized. This simple method could be used to investigate the effects of various physiological and molecular changes on the regeneration of adventitious roots. It is also useful for tracing cell lineage during the regeneration process by differential interference contrast observation of β-glucuronidase staining, and by live imaging of proteins labeled with fluorescent tags.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 2%
Philippines 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 127 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 18%
Researcher 20 15%
Student > Master 20 15%
Student > Bachelor 15 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 5%
Other 12 9%
Unknown 33 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 50 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 34 26%
Environmental Science 3 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 <1%
Computer Science 1 <1%
Other 3 2%
Unknown 39 30%
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 27 May 2014.
All research outputs
#18,371,959
of 22,755,127 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#13,633
of 20,059 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,872
of 226,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#80
of 157 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,755,127 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,059 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 226,949 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 157 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.