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 |
When a Plant Resistance Inducer Leaves the Lab for the Field: Integrating ASM into Routine Apple Protection Practices
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Plant Science, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpls.2017.01938 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Brice Marolleau, Matthieu Gaucher, Christelle Heintz, Alexandre Degrave, Romain Warneys, Gilles Orain, Arnaud Lemarquand, Marie-Noëlle Brisset |
| Abstract |
Plant resistance inducers, also called elicitors, could be useful to reduce the use of pesticides. However, their performance in controlling diseases in the field remains unsatisfactory due to lack of specific knowledge of how they can integrate crop protection practices. In this work, we focused on apple crop and acibenzolar-S-methyl (ASM), a well-known SAR (systemic acquired resistance) inducer of numerous plant species. We provide a protocol for orchard-effective control of apple scab due to the ascomycete fungus Venturia inaequalis, by applying ASM in combination with a light integrated pest management program. Besides we pave the way for future optimization levers by demonstrating in controlled conditions (i) the high influence of apple genotypes, (ii) the ability of ASM to prime defenses in newly formed leaves, (iii) the positive effect of repeated elicitor applications, (iv) the additive effect of a thinning fruit agent. |
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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 62 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 19% |
| Researcher | 11 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 13 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 39 | 63% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 6% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 14 | 23% |
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 07 January 2018.
All research outputs
#20,458,307
of 23,015,156 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#16,407
of 20,523 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#374,472
of 439,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#363
of 430 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,015,156 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 20,523 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 439,412 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 430 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.