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 |
Recovering complete plant root system architectures from soil via X-ray μ-Computed Tomography
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Plant Methods, March 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1746-4811-9-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Stefan Mairhofer, Susan Zappala, Saoirse Tracy, Craig Sturrock, Malcolm John Bennett, Sacha Jon Mooney, Tony Paul Pridmore |
| Abstract |
X-ray micro-Computed Tomography (μCT) offers the ability to visualise the three-dimensional structure of plant roots growing in their natural environment - soil. Recovery of root architecture descriptions from X-ray CT data is, however, challenging. The X-ray attenuation values of roots and soil overlap, and the attenuation values of root material vary. Any successful root identification method must both explicitly target root material and be able to adapt to local changes in root properties.RooTrak meets these requirements by combining the level set method with a visual tracking framework and has been shown to be capable of segmenting a variety of plant roots from soil in X-ray μCT images. The approach provides high quality root descriptions, but tracks root systems top to bottom and so omits upward-growing (plagiotropic) branches. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 188 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Mexico | 2 | 1% |
| Belgium | 2 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 180 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 46 | 24% |
| Researcher | 35 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 20 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 18 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 5% |
| Other | 34 | 18% |
| Unknown | 25 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 87 | 46% |
| Environmental Science | 12 | 6% |
| Engineering | 11 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 8 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 4% |
| Other | 23 | 12% |
| Unknown | 40 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 25 October 2022.
All research outputs
#2,712,902
of 23,575,882 outputs
Outputs from Plant Methods
#135
of 1,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,648
of 198,850 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Methods
#3
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,575,882 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,120 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
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 198,850 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.