↓ Skip to main content

Plant Life in Extreme Environments: How Do You Improve Drought Tolerance?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
170 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
Plant Life in Extreme Environments: How Do You Improve Drought Tolerance?
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2018.00543
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ulrike Bechtold

Abstract

Systems studies of drought stress in resurrection plants and other xerophytes are rapidly identifying a large number of genes, proteins and metabolites that respond to severe drought stress or desiccation. This has provided insight into drought resistance mechanisms, which allow xerophytes to persist under such extreme environmental conditions. Some of the mechanisms that ensure cellular protection during severe dehydration appear to be unique to desert species, while many other stress signaling pathways are in common with well-studied model and crop species. However, despite the identification of many desiccation inducible genes, there are few "gene-to-field" examples that have led to improved drought tolerance and yield stability derived from resurrection plants, and only few examples have emerged from model species. This has led to many critical reviews on the merit of the experimental approaches and the type of plants used to study drought resistance mechanisms. This article discusses the long-standing arguments between the ecophysiology and molecular biology communities, on how to "drought-proof" future crop varieties. It concludes that a more positive and inclusive dialogue between the different disciplines is needed, to allow us to move forward in a much more constructive way.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 170 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 170 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 14%
Researcher 24 14%
Student > Bachelor 21 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 9%
Student > Master 11 6%
Other 33 19%
Unknown 41 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 69 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 30 18%
Environmental Science 6 4%
Engineering 3 2%
Chemistry 3 2%
Other 9 5%
Unknown 50 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 16 July 2020.
All research outputs
#2,962,542
of 23,058,939 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#1,492
of 20,640 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,702
of 326,945 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#47
of 449 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,058,939 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,640 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
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 326,945 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 449 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.