↓ Skip to main content

Engineered Gold Nanoparticles and Plant Adaptation Potential

Overview of attention for article published in Nanoscale Research Letters, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
103 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 Mendeley
Title
Engineered Gold Nanoparticles and Plant Adaptation Potential
Published in
Nanoscale Research Letters, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s11671-016-1607-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Khwaja Salahuddin Siddiqi, Azamal Husen

Abstract

Use of metal nanoparticles in biological system has recently been recognised although little is known about their possible effects on plant growth and development. Nanoparticles accumulation, translocation, growth response and stress modulation in plant system is not well understood. Plants exposed to gold and gold nanoparticles have been demonstrated to exhibit both positive and negative effects. Their growth and yield vary from species to species. Cytoxicity of engineered gold nanoparticles depends on the concentration, particle size and shape. They exhibit increase in vegetative growth and yield of fruit/seed at lower concentration and decrease them at higher concentration. Studies have shown that the gold nanoparticles exposure has improved free radical scavenging potential and antioxidant enzymatic activities and alter micro RNAs expression that regulate different morphological, physiological and metabolic processes in plants. These modulations lead to improved plant growth and yields. Prior to the use of gold nanoparticles, it has been suggested that its cost may be calculated to see if it is economically feasible.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 101 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 16%
Student > Master 16 16%
Researcher 7 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 26 26%
Unknown 24 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 31%
Chemistry 10 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 9%
Engineering 4 4%
Materials Science 3 3%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 29 29%

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 21 September 2016.
All research outputs
#14,209,940
of 22,888,307 outputs
Outputs from Nanoscale Research Letters
#437
of 1,079 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,652
of 321,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nanoscale Research Letters
#5
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,888,307 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,079 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 321,166 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.