↓ Skip to main content

Safety of Pseudomonas chlororaphis as a gene source for genetically modified crops

Overview of attention for article published in Transgenic Research, February 2018
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 (72nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
Title
Safety of Pseudomonas chlororaphis as a gene source for genetically modified crops
Published in
Transgenic Research, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s11248-018-0061-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer A. Anderson, Jamie Staley, Mary Challender, Jamie Heuton

Abstract

Genetically modified crops undergo extensive evaluation to characterize their food, feed and environmental safety prior to commercial introduction, using a well-established, science-based assessment framework. One component of the safety assessment includes an evaluation of each introduced trait, including its source organism, for potential adverse pathogenic, toxic and allergenic effects. Several Pseudomonas species have a history of safe use in agriculture and certain species represent a source of genes with insecticidal properties. The ipd072Aa gene from P. chlororaphis encodes the IPD072Aa protein, which confers protection against certain coleopteran pests when expressed in maize plants. P. chlororaphis is ubiquitous in the environment, lacks known toxic or allergenic properties, and has a history of safe use in agriculture and in food and feed crops. This information supports, in part, the safety assessment of potential traits, such as IPD072Aa, that are derived from this source organism.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 36%
Student > Bachelor 2 18%
Unspecified 2 18%
Other 1 9%
Researcher 1 9%
Other 1 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 36%
Unspecified 3 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 18%
Psychology 1 9%
Engineering 1 9%
Other 0 0%

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 17 February 2018.
All research outputs
#2,894,487
of 12,521,852 outputs
Outputs from Transgenic Research
#190
of 666 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#95,580
of 345,860 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Transgenic Research
#2
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,521,852 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 666 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 345,860 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.