↓ Skip to main content

A nonsense mutation in a putative sulphate transporter gene results in low phytic acid in barley

Overview of attention for article published in Functional & Integrative Genomics, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
A nonsense mutation in a putative sulphate transporter gene results in low phytic acid in barley
Published in
Functional & Integrative Genomics, January 2011
DOI 10.1007/s10142-011-0209-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hongxia Ye, Xiao-Qi Zhang, Sue Broughton, Sharon Westcott, Dianxing Wu, Reg Lance, Chengdao Li

Abstract

Low phytic acid grains can provide a solution to dietary micronutrient deficiency and environmental pollution. A low phytic acid 1-1 (lpa1-1) barley mutant was identified using forward genetics and the mutant gene was mapped to chromosome 2HL. Comparative genomic analysis revealed that the lpa1-1 gene was located in the syntenic region of the rice Os-lpa-MH86-1 gene on chromosome 4. The gene ortholog of rice Os-lpa-MH86-1 (designated as HvST) was isolated from barley using polymerase chain reaction and mapped to chromosome 2HL in a doubled haploid population of Clipper×Sahara. The results demonstrate the collinearity between the rice Os-lpa-MH86-1 gene and the barley lpa1-1 region. Sequence analysis of HvST revealed a single base pair substitution (C→T transition) in the last exon of the gene in lpa1-1 (M422), which resulted in a nonsense mutation. These results will facilitate our understanding of the molecular mechanisms controlling the low phytic acid phenotype and assist in the development of a diagnostic marker for the selection of the lpa1-1 gene in barley.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Taiwan 1 6%
Czechia 1 6%
Unknown 14 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 31%
Student > Master 5 31%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 19%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 69%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 6%
Unspecified 1 6%
Environmental Science 1 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 6%
Other 1 6%

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 09 July 2011.
All research outputs
#7,030,267
of 12,230,555 outputs
Outputs from Functional & Integrative Genomics
#78
of 283 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,742,889
of 11,581,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Functional & Integrative Genomics
#78
of 273 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,230,555 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 283 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 11,581,039 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 273 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.