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 |
Draft genome sequences of three Xanthomonas translucens pathovar reference strains (pv. arrhenatheri, pv. poae and pv. phlei) with different specificities for forage grasses
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Microbiome, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40793-016-0170-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lena Hersemann, Daniel Wibberg, Franco Widmer, Frank-Jörg Vorhölter, Roland Kölliker |
| Abstract |
As causal agents of bacterial wilt in pastures and meadows, bacteria of the species Xanthomonas translucens are a serious issue in forage grass production. So far, only little is known about host-pathogen interactions at the molecular level and the lack of comprehensive genome data impeded targeted breeding strategies towards resistant forage grass cultivars. Here we announce the draft genome sequences of three grass-pathogenic Xanthomonas translucens pathotype strains, i.e. pv. arrhenatheri LMG 727, pv. poae LMG 728 and pv. phlei LMG 730 isolated from Arrhenatherum elatius (L.) P. Beauv. ex J. Presl & C. Presl (Switzerland), Poa trivialis L. (Switzerland) and Phleum pratense L. (Norway), respectively. The genomes of all three strains revealed a non-canonical type III secretion system and a set of 22 type III effectors as common virulence-related traits. Distinct inter-pathovar differences were observed for the lipopolysaccharide biosynthesis gene cluster and the presence of nonribosomal peptide synthetases. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 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 % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 21 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 23% |
| Researcher | 5 | 23% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 14% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 45% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 14% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 5% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 32% |
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 19 August 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Microbiome
#579
of 786 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#276,165
of 354,256 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Microbiome
#17
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 786 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 354,256 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.