↓ Skip to main content

New Insights on Leucine-Rich Repeats Receptor-Like Kinase Orthologous Relationships in Angiosperms

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
122 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
New Insights on Leucine-Rich Repeats Receptor-Like Kinase Orthologous Relationships in Angiosperms
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2017.00381
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jean-François Dufayard, Mathilde Bettembourg, Iris Fischer, Gaetan Droc, Emmanuel Guiderdoni, Christophe Périn, Nathalie Chantret, Anne Diévart

Abstract

Leucine-Rich Repeats Receptor-Like Kinase (LRR-RLK) genes represent a large and complex gene family in plants, mainly involved in development and stress responses. These receptors are composed of an LRR-containing extracellular domain (ECD), a transmembrane domain (TM) and an intracellular kinase domain (KD). To provide new perspectives on functional analyses of these genes in model and non-model plant species, we performed a phylogenetic analysis on 8,360 LRR-RLK receptors in 31 angiosperm genomes (8 monocots and 23 dicots). We identified 101 orthologous groups (OGs) of genes being conserved among almost all monocot and dicot species analyzed. We observed that more than 10% of these OGs are absent in the Brassicaceae species studied. We show that the ECD structural features are not always conserved among orthologs, suggesting that functions may have diverged in some OG sets. Moreover, we looked at targets of positive selection footprints in 12 pairs of OGs and noticed that depending on the subgroups, positive selection occurred more frequently either in the ECDs or in the KDs.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 <1%
Unknown 121 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 24%
Researcher 25 20%
Student > Master 10 8%
Student > Bachelor 9 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 28 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 60 49%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 24 20%
Environmental Science 1 <1%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 <1%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 <1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 33 27%
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 21 April 2017.
All research outputs
#15,378,413
of 23,630,563 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#9,959
of 21,699 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,181
of 310,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#313
of 552 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,630,563 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 21,699 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. 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 310,541 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 552 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.