↓ Skip to main content

Classical swine fever virus replicated poorly in cells from MxA transgenic pigs

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
Classical swine fever virus replicated poorly in cells from MxA transgenic pigs
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12917-016-0794-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yicheng Zhao, Tiedong Wang, Li Yao, Bo Liu, Chunbo Teng, Hongsheng Ouyang

Abstract

In addition to their value as livestock, pigs are susceptible to classical swine fever virus (CSFV) and can serve as reservoirs for CSFV, allowing it to develop into an epizootic. CSFV, a pestivirus of the Flaviviridae family, has a single-stranded RNA genome. Recent research has indicated that the human MxA protein inhibits the life cycles of certain RNA viruses, such as members of the Bunyaviridae family, the Flaviviridae family and others. To produce pigs with antiviral protection against CSFV, transgenic pigs expressing human MxA were generated by nuclear transplantation. Cells from three MxA transgenic piglets were used to investigate in vitro antiviral activity of MxA aganist CSFV, and the results of in vitro indirect immunofluorescence assays, virus titration and real-time PCR indicated that the MxA transgenic pig has an antiviral capacity against CSFV. Transgene with human MxA on pigs is feasible. High levels of MxA expression do inhibit CSFV in vitro at early time points post-infection at 60-96dpi.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 26%
Student > Bachelor 3 16%
Researcher 2 11%
Lecturer 1 5%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 5 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 26%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 11%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 5 26%
Attention Score in Context

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 September 2016.
All research outputs
#14,732,563
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#1,216
of 3,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,198
of 342,739 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#24
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,054 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% 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 342,739 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 44 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.