↓ Skip to main content

Immunoprofiling of Rice Root Cortex Reveals Two Cortical Subdomains

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, January 2016
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
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 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
Immunoprofiling of Rice Root Cortex Reveals Two Cortical Subdomains
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, January 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2015.01139
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sophia Henry, Fanchon Divol, Mathilde Bettembourg, Charlotte Bureau, Emmanuel Guiderdoni, Christophe Périn, Anne Diévart

Abstract

The formation and differentiation of aerenchyma, i.e., air-containing cavities that are critical for flooding tolerance, take place exclusively in the cortex. The understanding of development and differentiation of the cortex is thus an important issue; however, studies on this tissue are limited, partly because of the lack of available molecular tools. We screened a commercially available library of cell wall antibodies to identify markers of cortical tissue in rice roots. Out of the 174 antibodies screened, eight were cortex-specific. Our analysis revealed that two types of cortical tissues are present in rice root seedlings. We named these cell layers "inner" and "outer" based on their location relative to the stele. We then used the antibodies to clarify cell identity in lateral roots. Without these markers, previous studies could not distinguish between the cortex and sclerenchyma in small lateral roots. By immunostaining lateral root sections, we showed that the internal ground tissue in small lateral roots has outer cortical identity.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 52 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 23%
Researcher 10 19%
Student > Master 9 17%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Professor 3 6%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 8 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 36 68%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 9%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Engineering 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 9 17%
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 19 January 2016.
All research outputs
#17,780,575
of 22,837,982 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#12,024
of 20,152 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#267,571
of 393,723 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#228
of 458 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,837,982 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 20,152 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 393,723 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 458 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.