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 |
Amino acid substitutions involved in the adaptation of a novel highly pathogenic H5N2 avian influenza virus in mice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Virology Journal, September 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12985-016-0612-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Haibo Wu, Xiuming Peng, Xiaorong Peng, Nanping Wu |
| Abstract |
H5N2 avian influenza viruses (AIVs) can infect individuals that are in frequent contact with infected birds. In 2013, we isolated a novel reassortant highly pathogenic H5N2 AIV strain [A/duck/Zhejiang/6DK19/2013(H5N2) (6DK19)] from a duck in Eastern China. This study was undertaken to understand the adaptive processes that led enhanced replication and increased virulence of 6DK19 in mammals. 6DK19 was adapted to mice using serial lung-to-lung passages (10 passages total). The virulence of the wild-type virus (WT-6DK19) and mouse-adapted virus (MA-6DK19) was determined in mice. The whole-genome sequences of MA-6DK19 and WT-6DK19 were compared to determine amino acid differences. Amino acid changes were identified in the MA-DK19 PB2 (E627K), PB1 (I181T), HA (A150S), NS1 (seven amino acid extension "WRNKVAD" at the C-terminal), and NS2 (E69G) proteins. Survival and histology analyses demonstrated that MA-6DK19 was more virulent in mice than WT-6DK19. Our results suggest that these substitutions are involved in the enhanced replication efficiency and virulence of H5N2 AIVs in mammals. Continuing surveillance for H5N2 viruses in poultry that are carrying these mutations is required. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 6 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 6 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 50% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 17% |
| Researcher | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 33% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 17% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 1 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 26 September 2016.
All research outputs
#3,719,019
of 22,889,074 outputs
Outputs from Virology Journal
#362
of 3,052 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,900
of 321,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virology Journal
#8
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,889,074 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,052 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 25.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 321,669 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.