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.
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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Method for the Rapid Detection of Ralstonia solanacearum Phylotype I Mulberry Strains in China
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Plant Science, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpls.2017.00076 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wen Huang, Hao Zhang, Jingsheng Xu, Shuai Wang, Xiangjiu Kong, Wei Ding, Jin Xu, Jie Feng |
| Abstract |
Ralstonia solanacearum phylotype I mulberry strains are causative agent of bacterial wilt of mulberry. Current diagnostic methods are not adopted to the mulberry wilt disease. In this study, we developed a rapid method, loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), to detect R. solanacearum phylotype I mulberry strains. A set of six primers was designed to target the clone MG67 sequence in this LAMP detection which can be completed in 20 min at 64°C. The results of the LAMP reaction could be observed with the naked eye due to magnesium pyrophosphate precipitate produced during the reaction or the color change after adding SYBR Green I. The specificity of the LAMP was confirmed using DNA from 46 representative strains of R. solanacearum and 7 other soil-borne bacteria strains. This method was also of high sensitivity and could be used to detect the presence of less than 160 fg genomic DNA or 2.2 × 10(2) CFU/ml of bacterial cells per 25 μl reaction volume, moreover, the presence of plant tissue fluid did not affect the sensitivity. Since it does not require expensive equipment or specialized techniques, this LAMP-based diagnostic method has the potential to be used under field conditions to make disease forecasting more accurate and efficient. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 13% |
| Researcher | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 10% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 10 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 40% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 20% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Engineering | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 33% |
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 17 November 2020.
All research outputs
#18,536,772
of 22,958,253 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#13,891
of 20,389 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#310,660
of 420,252 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#346
of 508 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,958,253 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,389 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 420,252 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 508 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.