↓ Skip to main content

Characterization of Pseudomonas syringae pv. syringae, Causal Agent of Citrus Blast of Mandarin in Montenegro

Overview of attention for article published in Plant Pathology Journal, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
55 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
Characterization of <italic>Pseudomonas syringae</italic> pv. <italic>syringae</italic>, Causal Agent of Citrus Blast of Mandarin in Montenegro
Published in
Plant Pathology Journal, February 2017
DOI 10.5423/ppj.oa.08.2016.0161
Pubmed ID
Authors

Žarko Ivanović, Tatjana Perović, Tatjana Popović, Jovana Blagojević, Nenad Trkulja, Snježana Hrnčić

Abstract

Citrus blast caused by bacterium Pseudomonas syringae is a very important disease of citrus occuring in many areas of the world, but with few data about genetic structure of the pathogen involved. Considering the above fact, this study reports genetic characterization of 43 P. syringae isolates obtained from plant tissue displaying citrus blast symptoms on mandarin (Citrus reticulata) in Montenegro, using multilocus sequence analysis of gyrB, rpoD, and gap1 gene sequences. Gene sequences from a collection of 54 reference pathotype strains of P. syringae from the Plant Associated and Environmental Microbes Database (PAMDB) was used to establish a genetic relationship with our isolates obtained from mandarin. Phylogenetic analyses of gyrB, rpoD, and gap1 gene sequences showed that P. syringae pv. syringae causes citrus blast in mandarin in Montenegro, and belongs to genomospecies 1. Genetic homogeneity of isolates suggested that the Montenegrian population might be clonal which indicates a possible common source of infection. These findings may assist in further epidemiological studies of this pathogen and for determining mandarin breeding strategies for P. syringae control.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 8 15%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 11%
Student > Master 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 18 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 15%
Environmental Science 3 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Engineering 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 18 33%
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 11 February 2017.
All research outputs
#23,642,358
of 26,316,305 outputs
Outputs from Plant Pathology Journal
#302
of 374 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#371,973
of 430,588 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Pathology Journal
#4
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,316,305 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 374 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. 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 430,588 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 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.