↓ Skip to main content

Segregation distortion in Lolium: evidence for genetic effects

Overview of attention for article published in Theoretical & Applied Genetics, April 2008
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
Segregation distortion in Lolium: evidence for genetic effects
Published in
Theoretical & Applied Genetics, April 2008
DOI 10.1007/s00122-008-0774-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

U. C. M. Anhalt, P. (J. S.) Heslop-Harrison, S. Byrne, A. Guillard, S. Barth

Abstract

Segregation distortion (SD) is the deviation of genetic segregation ratios from their expected Mendelian fraction and is a common phenomenon found in most genetic mapping studies. In this study two segregating Lolium perenne populations were used to construct two genetic maps: an 'F(2) biomass' consisting of 360 genotypes and an 'F(1) late flowering' sibling based population consisting of 182 genotypes. Additionally two parental maps were generated for the 'F(1) late flowering' population. SD was detected and p-values for SD were calculated for each marker locus. The 'F(1) late flowering' map had only half of the extent of SD (32%) compared to the map based on the 'F(2) biomass' population (63%). Molecular marker data have been supplemented with genomic in situ hybridization (GISH) data to show non major non-recombined segments of Fescue chromosomes within the parental inbred ryegrass lines with a Festuca x Lolium pedigree. We conclude that SD in our study is more likely caused by genetic effects rather than by population structure and marker types. Two new L. perenne mapping populations including their genetic maps are introduced; one of them is the largest reported Lolium mapping population consisting of 360 individuals.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 3%
United Kingdom 1 3%
China 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Belgium 1 3%
Colombia 1 3%
Unknown 31 84%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 30%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 16%
Student > Master 4 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 11%
Unspecified 3 8%
Other 9 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 78%
Unspecified 4 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 5%
Environmental Science 2 5%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 28 August 2014.
All research outputs
#2,812,491
of 12,531,192 outputs
Outputs from Theoretical & Applied Genetics
#545
of 2,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,218
of 199,493 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Theoretical & Applied Genetics
#3
of 37 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,531,192 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 77th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,065 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.5. 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 199,493 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 37 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.