↓ Skip to main content

Comparative Analysis of Phenolic Compound Characterization and Their Biosynthesis Genes between Two Diverse Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Varieties Differing for Chapatti (Unleavened Flat Bread…

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, December 2016
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 (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
56 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
Comparative Analysis of Phenolic Compound Characterization and Their Biosynthesis Genes between Two Diverse Bread Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Varieties Differing for Chapatti (Unleavened Flat Bread) Quality
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, December 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2016.01870
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monica Sharma, Rajat Sandhir, Anuradha Singh, Pankaj Kumar, Ankita Mishra, Sanjay Jachak, Sukhvinder P. Singh, Jagdeep Singh, Joy Roy

Abstract

Phenolic compounds (PCs) affect the bread quality and can also affect the other types of end-use food products such as chapatti (unleavened flat bread), now globally recognized wheat-based food product. The detailed analysis of PCs and their biosynthesis genes in diverse bread wheat (Triticum aestivum) varieties differing for chapatti quality have not been studied. In this study, the identification and quantification of PCs using UPLC-QTOF-MS and/or MS/MS and functional genomics techniques such as microarrays and qRT-PCR of their biosynthesis genes have been studied in a good chapatti variety, "C 306" and a poor chapatti variety, "Sonalika." About 80% (69/87) of plant phenolic compounds were tentatively identified in these varieties. Nine PCs (hinokinin, coutaric acid, fertaric acid, p-coumaroylqunic acid, kaempferide, isorhamnetin, epigallocatechin gallate, methyl isoorientin-2'-O-rhamnoside, and cyanidin-3-rutinoside) were identified only in the good chapatti variety and four PCs (tricin, apigenindin, quercetin-3-O-glucuronide, and myricetin-3-glucoside) in the poor chapatti variety. Therefore, about 20% of the identified PCs are unique to each other and may be "variety or genotype" specific PCs. Fourteen PCs used for quantification showed high variation between the varieties. The microarray data of 44 phenolic compound biosynthesis genes and 17 of them on qRT-PCR showed variation in expression level during seed development and majority of them showed low expression in the good chapatti variety. The expression pattern in the good chapatti variety was largely in agreement with that of phenolic compounds. The level of variation of 12 genes was high between the good and poor chapatti quality varieties and has potential in development of markers. The information generated in this study can be extended onto a larger germplasm set for development of molecular markers using QTL and/or association mapping approaches for their application in wheat breeding.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 2%
Unknown 55 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 18%
Researcher 10 18%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 11 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 24 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 13%
Unspecified 2 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Chemistry 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 14 25%
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 26 December 2016.
All research outputs
#14,893,675
of 22,925,760 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#9,341
of 20,349 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#242,176
of 421,027 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#203
of 475 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,925,760 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,349 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 421,027 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 475 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 51% of its contemporaries.