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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Draft genome sequence for virulent and avirulent strains of Xanthomonas arboricola isolated from Prunus spp. in Spain
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Environmental Microbiome, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40793-016-0132-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jerson Garita-Cambronero, Ana Palacio-Bielsa, María M. López, Jaime Cubero |
| Abstract |
Xanthomonas arboricola is a species in genus Xanthomonas which is mainly comprised of plant pathogens. Among the members of this taxon, X. arboricola pv. pruni, the causal agent of bacterial spot disease of stone fruits and almond, is distributed worldwide although it is considered a quarantine pathogen in the European Union. Herein, we report the draft genome sequence, the classification, the annotation and the sequence analyses of a virulent strain, IVIA 2626.1, and an avirulent strain, CITA 44, of X. arboricola associated with Prunus spp. The draft genome sequence of IVIA 2626.1 consists of 5,027,671 bp, 4,720 protein coding genes and 50 RNA encoding genes. The draft genome sequence of strain CITA 44 consists of 4,760,482 bp, 4,250 protein coding genes and 56 RNA coding genes. Initial comparative analyses reveals differences in the presence of structural and regulatory components of the type IV pilus, the type III secretion system, the type III effectors as well as variations in the number of the type IV secretion systems. The genome sequence data for these strains will facilitate the development of molecular diagnostics protocols that differentiate virulent and avirulent strains. In addition, comparative genome analysis will provide insights into the plant-pathogen interaction during the bacterial spot disease process. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 29 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 34% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 13% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 2 | 6% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 5 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 47% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 19% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 22% |
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 02 February 2016.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Microbiome
#720
of 786 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#346,893
of 405,488 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Microbiome
#14
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 786 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 405,488 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.