↓ Skip to main content

WRKY6 restricts Piriformospora indica-stimulated and phosphate-induced root development in Arabidopsis

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 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
WRKY6 restricts Piriformospora indica-stimulated and phosphate-induced root development in Arabidopsis
Published in
BMC Plant Biology, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12870-015-0673-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Madhunita Bakshi, Khabat Vahabi, Samik Bhattacharya, Irena Sherameti, Ajit Varma, Kai-Wun Yeh, Ian Baldwin, Atul Kumar Johri, Ralf Oelmüller

Abstract

Arabidopsis root growth is stimulated by Piriformospora indica, phosphate limitation and inactivation of the WRKY6 transcription factor. Combinations of these factors induce unexpected alterations in root and shoot growth, root architecture and root gene expression profiles. The results demonstrate that P. indica promotes phosphate uptake and root development under Pi limitation in wrky6 mutant. This is associated with the stimulation of PHOSPHATE1 expression and ethylene production. Expression profiles from the roots of wrky6 seedlings identified genes involved in hormone metabolism, transport, meristem, cell and plastid proliferation, and growth regulation. 25 miRNAs were also up-regulated in these roots. We generated and discuss here a list of common genes which are regulated in growing roots and which are common to all three growth stimuli investigated in this study. Since root development of wrky6 plants exposed to P. indica under phosphate limitation is strongly promoted, we propose that common genes which respond to all three growth stimuli are central for the control of root growth and architecture. They can be tested for optimizing root growth in model and agricultural plants.

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 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
Unknown 65 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 25%
Student > Master 9 13%
Researcher 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 15 22%
Unknown 9 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 44 66%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Unknown 12 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 21 July 2016.
All research outputs
#17,779,578
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from BMC Plant Biology
#1,886
of 3,252 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#267,366
of 393,178 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Plant Biology
#33
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,252 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 393,178 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.