↓ Skip to main content

Meselect – A Rapid and Effective Method for the Separation of the Main Leaf Tissue Types

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 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
Meselect – A Rapid and Effective Method for the Separation of the Main Leaf Tissue Types
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, November 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2016.01701
Pubmed ID
Authors

Julia Svozil, Wilhelm Gruissem, Katja Baerenfaller

Abstract

Individual tissues of complex eukaryotic organisms have specific gene expression programs that control their functions. Therefore, tissue-specific molecular information is required to increase our understanding of tissue-specific processes. Established methods in plants to obtain specific tissues or cell types from their organ or tissue context typically require the enzymatic degradation of cell walls followed by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS) using plants engineered for localized expression of green fluorescent protein. This has facilitated the acquisition of valuable data, mainly on root cell type-specific transcript and protein expression. However, FACS of different leaf cell types is difficult because of chlorophyll autofluorescence that interferes with the sorting process. Furthermore, the cell wall composition is different in each cell type. This results in long incubation times for refractory cell types, and cell sorting itself can take several hours. To overcome these limitations, we developed Meselect (mechanical separation of leaf compound tissues), a rapid and effective method for the separation of leaf epidermal, vascular and mesophyll tissues. Meselect is a novel combination of mechanical separation and rapid protoplasting, which benefits from the unique cell wall composition of the different tissue types. Meselect has several advantages over cell sorting: it does not require expensive equipment such as a cell sorter and does not depend on specific fluorescent reporter lines, the use of blenders as well as the inherent mixing of different cell types and of intact and damaged cells can be avoided, and the time between wounding of the leaf and freezing of the sample is short. The efficacy and specificity of the method to enrich the different leaf tissue types has been confirmed using Arabidopsis leaves, but it has also been successfully used for leaves of other plants such as tomato or cassava. The method is therefore useful for plant scientists investigating leaf development or responses to stimuli at the tissue-specific level.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 25%
Researcher 12 19%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Lecturer 3 5%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 12 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 27%
Chemistry 2 3%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 11 17%
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 22 November 2016.
All research outputs
#15,393,913
of 22,901,818 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#10,931
of 20,322 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,463
of 306,450 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#208
of 427 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,901,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,322 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 306,450 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 427 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.