| Title |
Bean common bacterial blight: pathogen epiphytic life and effect of irrigation practices
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, February 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1186/2193-1801-2-41 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alireza Akhavan, Masoud Bahar, Homa Askarian, Mohammad Reza Lak, Abolfazl Nazemi, Zahra Zamani |
| Abstract |
In recent years, bean common bacterial blight (CBB) caused by Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. phaseoli (Xap) has caused serious yield losses in several countries. CBB is considered mainly a foliar disease in which symptoms initially appear as small water-soaked spots that then enlarge and become necrotic and usually bordered by a chlorotic zone. Xap epiphytic population community has a critical role in the development of the disease and subsequent epidemics. The epiphytic population of Xap in the field has two major parts; solitary cells (potentially planktonic) and biofilms which are sources for providing and refreshing the solitary cell components. Irrigation type has a significant effect on epiphytic population of Xap. The mean epiphytic population size in the field with an overhead sprinkler irrigation system is significantly higher than populations under furrow irrigation. A significant positive correlation between the epiphytic population size of Xap and disease severity has been reported in both the overhead irrigated (r=0.64) and the furrow irrigated (r= 0.44) fields. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 70 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 16 | 23% |
| Researcher | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 10% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 11% |
| Unknown | 19 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 38 | 54% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 7 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 1% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 18 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 16 October 2014.
All research outputs
#7,180,770
of 22,696,971 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#455
of 1,852 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#81,731
of 284,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#18
of 109 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,696,971 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,852 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 284,066 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 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 109 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.