↓ Skip to main content

Quantification of variability in trichome patterns

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 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
Quantification of variability in trichome patterns
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, November 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2014.00596
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bettina Greese, Martin Hülskamp, Christian Fleck

Abstract

While pattern formation is studied in various areas of biology, little is known about the noise leading to variations between individual realizations of the pattern. One prominent example for de novo pattern formation in plants is the patterning of trichomes on Arabidopsis leaves, which involves genetic regulation and cell-to-cell communication. These processes are potentially variable due to, e.g., the abundance of cell components or environmental conditions. To elevate the understanding of regulatory processes underlying the pattern formation it is crucial to quantitatively analyze the variability in naturally occurring patterns. Here, we review recent approaches toward characterization of noise on trichome initiation. We present methods for the quantification of spatial patterns, which are the basis for data-driven mathematical modeling and enable the analysis of noise from different sources. Besides the insight gained on trichome formation, the examination of observed trichome patterns also shows that highly regulated biological processes can be substantially affected by variability.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
China 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 43 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 26%
Student > Bachelor 7 15%
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Master 6 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 5 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 52%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 24%
Mathematics 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 4 9%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 14 January 2015.
All research outputs
#13,923,205
of 22,770,070 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#7,247
of 20,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,138
of 258,732 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#79
of 206 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,770,070 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,065 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 258,732 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 206 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.