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 |
Suppression of SlMBP15 Inhibits Plant Vegetative Growth and Delays Fruit Ripening in Tomato
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Plant Science, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpls.2018.00938 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wencheng Yin, Xiaohui Yu, Guoping Chen, Boyan Tang, Yunshu Wang, Changguang Liao, Yanjie Zhang, Zongli Hu |
| Abstract |
MADS-box genes have been demonstrated to participate in a number of processes in tomato development, especially fruit ripening. In this study, we reported a novel MADS-box gene, SlMBP15, which is implicated in fruit ripening. Based on statistical analysis, the ripening time of SlMBP15-silenced tomato was delayed by 2-4 days compared with that of the wild-type (WT). The accumulation of carotenoids and biosynthesis of ethylene in fruits were decreased in SlMBP15-silenced tomato. Genes related to carotenoid and ethylene biosynthesis were greatly repressed. SlMBP15 can interact with RIN, a MADS-box regulator affecting the carotenoid accumulation and ethylene biosynthesis in tomato. In addition, SlMBP15-silenced tomato produced dark green leaves, and its plant height was reduced. The gibberellin (GA) content of transgenic plants was lower than that of the WT and GA biosynthesis genes were repressed. These results demonstrated that SlMBP15 not only positively regulated tomato fruit ripening but also affected the morphogenesis of the vegetative organs. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 27% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 5 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 41% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 23% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 5% |
| Engineering | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 27% |
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 10 August 2018.
All research outputs
#17,985,001
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#12,272
of 20,719 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,080
of 328,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#329
of 481 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 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 20,719 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 328,028 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 481 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.