| Title |
Agrobacterium rhizogenes mediated hairy root induction in endangered Berberis aristata DC.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
SpringerPlus, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s40064-015-1222-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Latika Brijwal, Sushma Tamta |
| Abstract |
An efficient protocol for hairy root induction in Berberis aristata DC. was established using two different strains of Agrobacterium rhizogenes, MTCC 532 and 2364 from IMTECH (Institute of Microbial Technology), Chandigarh, India. The strain 532 was more effective than strain 2364 in hairy root induction and in vitro grown callus (61.11 ± 1.60 % transformation frequency) was found to be suitable explant in comparison to leaves (42.59 ± 0.92 % transformation frequency) and nodal segments (34.25 ± 0.92 % transformation frequency) of in vitro grown microshoots for hairy root induction. The presence of rol A and rol B genes during amplification confirmed the transgenic nature of hairy roots and transformed callus. Transformation frequency of callus was further enhanced (from 61.11 ± 1.60 % to 72.22 ± 1.60 %; when infection time was 1 h) by using acetosyringone (100 µM) during co-cultivation period (48 h) on semisolid MS (Murashige and Skoog) medium. In conclusion, this study describes the protocol for hairy root induction which could further be useful for the production of berberin and may reduce the overharvesting of this endangered species from its natural habitat. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 70 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 17% |
| Researcher | 11 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 9% |
| Unknown | 14 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 32 | 46% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 13 | 19% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 3% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 1% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 16 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 2015.
All research outputs
#20,290,425
of 22,826,360 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,460
of 1,851 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#223,466
of 266,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#95
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,826,360 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,851 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 266,223 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 121 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.