↓ Skip to main content

Assessment of the Effect of Seed Infection with Ascochyta pisi on Pea in Western Canada

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
Assessment of the Effect of Seed Infection with Ascochyta pisi on Pea in Western Canada
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2017.00933
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nimllash T. Sivachandra Kumar, Sabine Banniza

Abstract

The role of seed infection with Ascochyta pisi using naturally infected seeds with an incidence from 0.5 to 14.5% was studied in field pea experiments in western Canada at locations with historically low inoculum pressure. A significant effect of A. pisi seed infection on the emergence of seedlings was observed in one experiment and when all data were pooled, but emergence was only reduced minimally, and symptoms of A. pisi on the aerial parts of the seedlings were rarely observed. The level of seed infection at planting had no impact on A. pisi disease severity on mature plants, on seed yield and size, or on the incidence of A. pisi infection of harvested seeds although A. pisi was the dominant species recovered from seeds. Results suggest that the disease did not progress significantly from seeds to seedlings, hence did not contribute to infection of aerial parts of the plants, and therefore infected seeds cannot be regarded as a source of inoculum in the epidemiology of this pathogen under western Canadian growing conditions. Assessing seed components of seeds with varying levels of A. pisi infection and seed staining revealed that the pathogen was present in all components of the seed, regardless of the severity of seed staining. This indicates that infected seeds may be an important way for the pathogen to survive in nature.

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.
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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 17%
Other 3 13%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 17%
Engineering 1 4%
Unknown 10 42%
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 July 2017.
All research outputs
#15,418,980
of 22,988,380 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#10,743
of 20,454 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,430
of 317,398 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#361
of 579 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,988,380 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,454 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 317,398 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 579 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.