Timothy Kelliher, Dakota Starr, Wenling Wang, Jamie McCuiston, Heng Zhong, Michael L. Nuccio, Barry Martin
Abstract
Doubled haploid plants are invaluable breeding tools but many crop species are recalcitrant to available haploid induction techniques. To test if haploid inducer lines can be engineered into crops, CENH3 (-∕-) and CENH3:RNAi lines were complemented by AcGREEN-tailswap-CENH3 or AcGREEN-CENH3 transgenes. Haploid induction rates were determined following testcrosses to wild-type plants after independently controlling for inducer parent sex and transgene zygosity. CENH3 fusion proteins were localized to centromeres and did not cause vegetative defects or male sterility. CENH3:RNAi lines did not demonstrate consistent knockdown and rarely produced haploids. In contrast, many of the complemented CENH3 (-∕-) lines produced haploids at low frequencies. The rate of gynogenic haploid induction reached a maximum of 3.6% in several hemizygous individuals when backcrossed as males. These results demonstrate that CENH3-tailswap transgenes can be used to engineer in vivo haploid induction systems into maize plants.
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 March 2017.
All research outputs
#14,267,420
of 22,879,161 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#8,188
of 20,270 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,527
of 301,051 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#189
of 504 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,879,161 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,270 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. 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 301,051 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 504 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.
