↓ Skip to main content

How well do you know your growth chambers? Testing for chamber effect using plant traits

Overview of attention for article published in Plant Methods, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
108 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
How well do you know your growth chambers? Testing for chamber effect using plant traits
Published in
Plant Methods, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13007-015-0088-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amanda S. Porter, Christiana Evans-Fitz.Gerald, Jennifer C. McElwain, Charilaos Yiotis, Caroline Elliott-Kingston

Abstract

Plant growth chambers provide a controlled environment to analyse the effects of environmental parameters (light, temperature, atmospheric gas composition etc.) on plant function. However, it has been shown that a 'chamber effect' may exist whereby results observed are not due to an experimental treatment but to inconspicuous differences in supposedly identical chambers. In this study, Vicia faba L. 'Aquadulce Claudia' (broad bean) plants were grown in eight walk-in chambers to establish if a chamber effect existed, and if so, what plant traits are best for detecting such an effect. A range of techniques were used to measure differences between chamber plants, including chlorophyll fluorescence measurements, gas exchange analysis, biomass, reproductive yield, anatomical traits and leaf stable carbon isotopes. Four of the eight chambers exhibited a chamber effect. In particular, we identified two types of chamber effect which we term 'resolvable' or 'unresolved'; a resolvable chamber effect is caused by malfunctioning components of a chamber and an unresolved chamber effect is caused by unknown factors that can only be mitigated by appropriate experimental design and sufficient replication. Not all measured plant traits were able to detect a chamber effect and no single trait was capable of detecting all chamber effects. Fresh weight and flower count detected a chamber effect in three chambers, stable carbon isotopes (δ(13)C) and net rate CO2 assimilation (An) identified a chamber effect in two chambers, stomatal conductance (gs) and total performance index detected an effect only in one chamber. (1) Chamber effects can be adequately detected by fresh weight measurements and flower counts on Vicia faba plants. These methods were the most effective in terms of detection and most efficient in terms of time. (2) δ(13)C, gs and An measurements help distinguish between resolvable and unresolved chamber effects. (3) Unresolved chamber effects require experimental unit replication while resolvable chamber effects require investigation, repair and retesting in advance of initiating further experiments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 108 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 106 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 19%
Student > Master 20 19%
Student > Bachelor 11 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 6%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 15 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 52 48%
Environmental Science 12 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 6%
Engineering 6 6%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 3%
Other 7 6%
Unknown 21 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 05 September 2016.
All research outputs
#4,644,141
of 24,833,004 outputs
Outputs from Plant Methods
#268
of 1,209 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,971
of 280,233 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Methods
#5
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,833,004 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,209 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 77% 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 280,233 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 79% 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.