↓ Skip to main content

Rice Sheath Rot: An Emerging Ubiquitous Destructive Disease Complex

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
81 Dimensions

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
Rice Sheath Rot: An Emerging Ubiquitous Destructive Disease Complex
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, December 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2015.01066
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vincent de P. Bigirimana, Gia K. H. Hua, Obedi I. Nyamangyoku, Monica Höfte

Abstract

Around one century ago, a rice disease characterized mainly by rotting of sheaths was reported in Taiwan. The causal agent was identified as Acrocylindrium oryzae, later known as Sarocladium oryzae. Since then it has become clear that various other organisms can cause similar disease symptoms, including Fusarium sp. and fluorescent pseudomonads. These organisms have in common that they produce a range of phytotoxins that induce necrosis in plants. The same agents also cause grain discoloration, chaffiness, and sterility and are all seed-transmitted. Rice sheath rot disease symptoms are found in all rice-growing areas of the world. The disease is now getting momentum and is considered as an important emerging rice production threat. The disease can lead to variable yield losses, which can be as high as 85%. This review aims at improving our understanding of the disease etiology of rice sheath rot and mainly deals with the three most reported rice sheath rot pathogens: S. oryzae, the Fusarium fujikuroi complex, and Pseudomonas fuscovaginae. Causal agents, pathogenicity determinants, interactions among the various pathogens, epidemiology, geographical distribution, and control options will be discussed.

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 %
India 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 120 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 13%
Researcher 15 12%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 4%
Other 9 7%
Unknown 48 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 53 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 5%
Environmental Science 5 4%
Engineering 2 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 <1%
Other 5 4%
Unknown 50 41%
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 28 April 2018.
All research outputs
#17,778,896
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#12,023
of 20,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#264,677
of 389,181 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#209
of 408 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,148 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 389,181 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 408 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.