↓ Skip to main content

Stochastic models of cellular circadian rhythms in plants help to understand the impact of noise on robustness and clock structure

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 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
Stochastic models of cellular circadian rhythms in plants help to understand the impact of noise on robustness and clock structure
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, October 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2014.00564
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maria L. Guerriero, Ozgur E. Akman, Gerben van Ooijen

Abstract

Rhythmic behavior is essential for plants; for example, daily (circadian) rhythms control photosynthesis and seasonal rhythms regulate their life cycle. The core of the circadian clock is a genetic network that coordinates the expression of specific clock genes in a circadian rhythm reflecting the 24-h day/night cycle. Circadian clocks exhibit stochastic noise due to the low copy numbers of clock genes and the consequent cell-to-cell variation: this intrinsic noise plays a major role in circadian clocks by inducing more robust oscillatory behavior. Another source of noise is the environment, which causes variation in temperature and light intensity: this extrinsic noise is part of the requirement for the structural complexity of clock networks. Advances in experimental techniques now permit single-cell measurements and the development of single-cell models. Here we present some modeling studies showing the importance of considering both types of noise in understanding how plants adapt to regular and irregular light variations. Stochastic models have proven useful for understanding the effect of regular variations. By contrast, the impact of irregular variations and the interaction of different noise sources are less well studied.

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 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 3 4%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 69 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 21%
Student > Master 15 21%
Researcher 14 19%
Professor 5 7%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 7 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 42%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 19%
Mathematics 3 4%
Engineering 3 4%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 11 15%
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 11 January 2018.
All research outputs
#17,730,142
of 22,768,097 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#11,935
of 20,063 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,890
of 259,774 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#120
of 199 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,768,097 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,063 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 259,774 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 199 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.