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 |
Carbon and fullerene nanomaterials in plant system
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Nanobiotechnology, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1477-3155-12-16 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Azamal Husen, Khwaja Salahuddin Siddiqi |
| Abstract |
Both the functionalized and non functionalized carbon nanomaterials influence fruit and crop production in edible plants and vegetables. The fullerene, C60 and carbon nanotubes have been shown to increase the water retaining capacity, biomass and fruit yield in plants up to ~118% which is a remarkable achievement of nanotechnology in recent years. The fullerene treated bitter melon seeds also increase the phytomedicine contents such as cucurbitacin-B (74%), lycopene (82%), charantin (20%) and insulin (91%). Since as little as 50 μg mL-1 of carbon nanotubes increase the tomato production by about 200%, they may be exploited to enhance the agriculture production in future. It has been observed that, in certain cases, non functionalized multi-wall carbon nanotubes are toxic to both plants and animals but the toxicity can be drastically reduced if they are functionalized. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 195 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sri Lanka | 2 | 1% |
| Turkey | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 188 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 31 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 28 | 14% |
| Researcher | 20 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 18 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 12 | 6% |
| Other | 34 | 17% |
| Unknown | 52 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 55 | 28% |
| Chemistry | 20 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 11 | 6% |
| Environmental Science | 11 | 6% |
| Engineering | 8 | 4% |
| Other | 30 | 15% |
| Unknown | 60 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 23 January 2017.
All research outputs
#14,600,553
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nanobiotechnology
#464
of 1,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,704
of 241,810 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nanobiotechnology
#4
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,919 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 241,810 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.