↓ Skip to main content

The modification and evaluation of an ELISA test for the surveillance of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis infection in wild ruminants

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The modification and evaluation of an ELISA test for the surveillance of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis infection in wild ruminants
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, January 2013
DOI 10.1186/1746-6148-9-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pruvot M, Forde TL, Steele J, Kutz SJ, Buck JD, Meer FV, Orsel K, Mathieu Pruvot, Taya L Forde, Jillian Steele, Susan J Kutz, Jeroen De Buck, Frank van der Meer, Karin Orsel

Abstract

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) is often used to test wildlife samples for Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis (MAP) infection. However, commercially available kits are only validated for use with domestic ruminant species. A literature review was performed to document the current use of MAP serum ELISA in wild and semi-domestic ruminants. We then modified and evaluated a commercial ELISA kit (IDEXX Mycobacterium paratuberculosis Antibody Test Kit) for use with species for which it was not originally developed: elk (Cervus elaphus), bison (Bison bison) and caribou (Rangifer tarandus). We tested the affinity of different conjugates for immunoglobulin G (IgG) isolated from these species, performed checkerboard tests to determine the optimal dilutions of samples and conjugates, and established cut-off values using two different methods: a Receiver Operational Curve on a panel of known samples for elk, and an alternate method involving a panel of unknown serum samples for the three species.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 45 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 36%
Student > Master 8 17%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 3 6%
Other 5 11%
Unknown 4 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 43%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 11 23%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Social Sciences 2 4%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 5 11%

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 09 January 2013.
All research outputs
#3,077,280
of 4,507,211 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#547
of 795 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,089
of 283,823 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#37
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,507,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 795 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 283,823 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.