↓ Skip to main content

Proline affects the size of the root meristematic zone in Arabidopsis

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (59th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
Proline affects the size of the root meristematic zone in Arabidopsis
Published in
BMC Plant Biology, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12870-015-0637-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marco Biancucci, Roberto Mattioli, Laila Moubayidin, Sabrina Sabatini, Paolo Costantino, Maurizio Trovato

Abstract

We reported previously that root elongation in Arabidopsis is promoted by exogenous proline, raising the possibility that this amino acid may modulate root growth. To evaluate this hypothesis we used a combination of genetic, pharmacological and molecular analyses, and showed that proline specifically affects root growth by modulating the size of the root meristem. The effects of proline on meristem size are parallel to, and independent from, hormonal pathways, and do not involve the expression of genes controlling cell differentiation at the transition zone. On the contrary, proline appears to control cell division in early stages of postembryonic root development, as shown by the expression of the G2/M-specific CYCLINB1;1 (CYCB1;1) gene. The overall data suggest that proline can modulate the size of root meristematic zone in Arabidopsis likely controlling cell division and, in turn, the ratio between cell division and cell differentiation.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 20%
Student > Master 6 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 15 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 24%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 1 2%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Unknown 17 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 07 July 2016.
All research outputs
#14,827,682
of 22,831,537 outputs
Outputs from BMC Plant Biology
#1,276
of 3,250 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,580
of 284,657 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Plant Biology
#20
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,831,537 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,250 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 284,657 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 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 59% of its contemporaries.