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 |
Recent developments in fast spectroscopy for plant mineral analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Plant Science, March 2015
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpls.2015.00169 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marie van Maarschalkerweerd, Søren Husted |
| Abstract |
Ideal fertilizer management to optimize plant productivity and quality is more relevant than ever, as global food demands increase along with the rapidly growing world population. At the same time, sub-optimal or excessive use of fertilizers leads to severe environmental damage in areas of intensive crop production. The approaches of soil and plant mineral analysis are briefly compared and discussed here, and the new techniques using fast spectroscopy that offer cheap, rapid, and easy-to-use analysis of plant nutritional status are reviewed. The majority of these methods use vibrational spectroscopy, such as visual-near infrared and to a lesser extent ultraviolet and mid-infrared spectroscopy. Advantages of and problems with application of these techniques are thoroughly discussed. Spectroscopic techniques considered having major potential for plant mineral analysis, such as chlorophyll a fluorescence, X-ray fluorescence, and laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy are also described. |
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 202 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Algeria | 1 | <1% |
| Kenya | 1 | <1% |
| Norway | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 197 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 35 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 35 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 29 | 14% |
| Unknown | 43 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 77 | 38% |
| Engineering | 21 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 15 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 8 | 4% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 6 | 3% |
| Other | 23 | 11% |
| Unknown | 52 | 26% |
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 25 March 2015.
All research outputs
#20,258,256
of 22,787,797 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#15,973
of 20,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#222,901
of 263,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#216
of 252 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,787,797 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 20,075 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 263,330 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 252 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.