↓ Skip to main content

Seed shattering: from models to crops

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, June 2015
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 (60th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
110 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
155 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
Seed shattering: from models to crops
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, June 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2015.00476
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yang Dong, Yin-Zheng Wang

Abstract

Seed shattering (or pod dehiscence, or fruit shedding) is essential for the propagation of their offspring in wild plants but is a major cause of yield loss in crops. In the dicot model species, Arabidopsis thaliana, pod dehiscence necessitates a development of the abscission zones along the pod valve margins. In monocots, such as cereals, an abscission layer in the pedicle is required for the seed shattering process. In the past decade, great advances have been made in characterizing the genetic contributors that are involved in the complex regulatory network in the establishment of abscission cell identity. We summarize the recent burgeoning progress in the field of genetic regulation of pod dehiscence and fruit shedding, focusing mainly on the model species A. thaliana with its close relatives and the fleshy fruit species tomato, as well as the genetic basis responsible for the parallel loss of seed shattering in domesticated crops. This review shows how these individual genes are co-opted in the developmental process of the tissues that guarantee seed shattering. Research into the genetic mechanism underlying seed shattering provides a premier prerequisite for the future breeding program for harvest in crops.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Unknown 153 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 15%
Student > Master 20 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 12%
Student > Bachelor 14 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 5%
Other 25 16%
Unknown 46 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 74 48%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 23 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 1%
Unspecified 1 <1%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 <1%
Other 6 4%
Unknown 48 31%
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 31 August 2015.
All research outputs
#16,579,551
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#10,760
of 24,593 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#154,475
of 278,432 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#109
of 280 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,593 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 278,432 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 280 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 60% of its contemporaries.