↓ Skip to main content

Potential of Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus populations in the Central African Republic to transmit enzootic chikungunya virus strains

Overview of attention for article published in Parasites & Vectors, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 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
Potential of Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus populations in the Central African Republic to transmit enzootic chikungunya virus strains
Published in
Parasites & Vectors, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13071-017-2101-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carine Ngoagouni, Basile Kamgang, Mirdad Kazanji, Christophe Paupy, Emmanuel Nakouné

Abstract

Major chikungunya outbreaks have affected several Central African countries during the past decade. The chikungunya virus (CHIKV) was isolated from humans and sylvan mosquitoes in the Central African Republic (CAR) during the 1970 and 1980s but has not been found recently, despite the presence of Aedes albopictus since 2010. The risk of a massive chikungunya epidemic is therefore potentially high, as the human populations are immunologically naïve and because of the presence of the mosquito vector. In order to estimate the risk of a large outbreak, we assessed the vector competence of local Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus populations for ancient local strains of CHIKV in CAR. Mosquitoes were orally infected with the virus, and its presence in mosquito saliva was analysed 7 and 14 days post-infection (dpi) by quantitative reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. The two species had similar infection rates at 7 and 14 days, and the dissemination rate of both vectors was ≥ 80% at 14 dpi. Only females followed up to 14 dpi had CHKV in their saliva. These results confirm the risk of transmission of enzootic CHIKV by anthropophilic vectors such as Ae. aegypti and Ae. albopictus.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 72 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Master 11 15%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 8%
Other 16 22%
Unknown 14 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 14 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 7%
Chemistry 3 4%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 14 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 31 March 2017.
All research outputs
#6,287,942
of 22,961,203 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#1,391
of 5,484 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#101,436
of 308,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#36
of 159 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,961,203 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,484 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 308,951 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 159 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.