↓ Skip to main content

Within leaf variation is the largest source of variation in agroinfiltration of Nicotiana benthamiana

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

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
164 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
Within leaf variation is the largest source of variation in agroinfiltration of Nicotiana benthamiana
Published in
Plant Methods, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13007-015-0091-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hany Bashandy, Salla Jalkanen, Teemu H. Teeri

Abstract

Transient gene expression utilizing syringe agroinfiltration offers a simple and efficient technique for different transgenic applications. Leaves of Nicotiana benthamiana show reliable and high transformation efficiency, but in quantitative assays also a certain degree of variation. We used a nested design in our agroinfiltration experiments to dissect the sources of this variation. An intron containing firefly luciferase gene was used as a reporter for agroinfiltration. A number of 6 week old tobacco plants were infiltrated for their top leaves, several samples were punched from the leaves after 2 days of transient expression, and protein extracts from the samples were repeatedly measured for luciferase activity. Interestingly, most of the variation was due to differences between the sampling spots in the leaves, the next important source being the different leaves on each plant. Variation between similar experiments, between plants and between repetitive measurements of the extracts could be easily minimized. Efforts and expenditure of agroinfiltration experiments can be optimized when sources of variation are known. In summary, infiltrate more plants but less leaves, sample more positions on the leaf but run only few technical replicates.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 164 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Unknown 162 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 19%
Student > Bachelor 30 18%
Researcher 28 17%
Student > Master 24 15%
Student > Postgraduate 8 5%
Other 12 7%
Unknown 31 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 70 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 52 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 1%
Environmental Science 1 <1%
Unspecified 1 <1%
Other 4 2%
Unknown 34 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 September 2017.
All research outputs
#6,903,187
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from Plant Methods
#441
of 1,082 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,119
of 279,406 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Methods
#4
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,082 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% 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 279,406 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 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 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 63% of its contemporaries.