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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Comparison of competitive exclusion with classical cleaning and disinfection on bacterial load in pig nursery units
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Veterinary Research, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12917-016-0810-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
K. Luyckx, S. Millet, S. Van Weyenberg, L. Herman, M. Heyndrickx, J. Dewulf, K. De Reu |
| Abstract |
Colonisation of the environment of nursery units by pathogenic micro-organisms is an important factor in the persistence and spread of endemic diseases in pigs and zoonotic pathogens. These pathogens are generally controlled by the use of antibiotics and disinfectants. Since an increasing resistance against these measures has been reported in recent years, methods such as competitive exclusion (CE) are promoted as promising alternatives. This study showed that the infection pressure in CE units after microbial cleaning was not reduced to the same degree as in control units. Despite sufficient administration of probiotic-type spores, the analysed bacteria did not decrease in number after 3 production rounds in CE units, indicating no competitive exclusion. In addition, no differences in feed conversion were found between piglets raised in CE and control units in our study. Also, no differences in faecal consistency (indicator for enteric diseases) was noticed. These results indicate that the CE protocol is not a valuable alternative for classical C&D. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Belgium | 1 | 25% |
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 48 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 9 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 8% |
| Professor | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 17% |
| Unknown | 15 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 10 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 8% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 4% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 19 | 40% |
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 24 October 2016.
All research outputs
#14,271,203
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#1,110
of 3,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,982
of 334,695 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#25
of 57 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 60% 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 334,695 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 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.