↓ Skip to main content

Recommendations of generic names in Diaporthales competing for protection or use

Overview of attention for article published in IMA Fungus, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
66 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
Recommendations of generic names in Diaporthales competing for protection or use
Published in
IMA Fungus, June 2015
DOI 10.5598/imafungus.2015.06.01.09
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amy Y. Rossman, Gerard C. Adams, Paul F. Cannon, Lisa A. Castlebury, Pedro W. Crous, Marieka Gryzenhout, Walter M. Jaklitsch, Luis C. Mejia, Dmitar Stoykov, Dhanushka Udayanga, Hermann Voglmayr, Donald M. Walker

Abstract

In advancing to one name for fungi, this paper treats generic names competing for use in the order Diaporthales (Ascomycota, Sordariomycetes) and makes a recommendation for the use or protection of one generic name among synonymous names that may be either sexually or asexually typified. A table is presented that summarizes these recommendations. Among the genera most commonly encountered in this order, Cytospora is recommended over Valsa and Diaporthe over Phomopsis. New combinations are introduced for the oldest epithet of important species in the recommended genus. These include Amphiporthe tiliae, Coryneum lanciforme, Cytospora brevispora, C. ceratosperma, C. cinereostroma, C. eugeniae, C. fallax, C. myrtagena, Diaporthe amaranthophila, D. annonacearum, D. bougainvilleicola, D. caricae-papayae, D. cocoina, D. cucurbitae, D. juniperivora, D. leptostromiformis, D. pterophila, D. theae, D. vitimegaspora, Mastigosporella georgiana, Pilidiella angustispora, P. calamicola, P. pseudogranati, P. stromatica, and P. terminaliae.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
United States 1 2%
India 1 2%
Unknown 63 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 23%
Student > Master 10 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 15 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 35 53%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 11%
Unspecified 1 2%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 15 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 19 February 2019.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from IMA Fungus
#116
of 253 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,046
of 281,062 outputs
Outputs of similar age from IMA Fungus
#4
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 253 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 281,062 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 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.