↓ Skip to main content

Field study site selection, species abundance and monthly distribution of anopheline mosquitoes in the northern Kruger National Park, South Africa

Overview of attention for article published in Malaria Journal, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (58th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
103 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
Field study site selection, species abundance and monthly distribution of anopheline mosquitoes in the northern Kruger National Park, South Africa
Published in
Malaria Journal, January 2014
DOI 10.1186/1475-2875-13-27
Pubmed ID
Authors

Givemore Munhenga, Basil D Brooke, Belinda Spillings, Leyya Essop, Richard H Hunt, Stephen Midzi, Danny Govender, Leo Braack, Lizette L Koekemoer

Abstract

Knowledge of the ecology and behaviour of a target species is a prerequisite for the successful development of any vector control strategy. Before the implementation of any strategy it is essential to have comprehensive information on the bionomics of species in the targeted area. The aims of this study were to conduct regular entomological surveillance and to determine the relative abundance of anopheline species in the northern Kruger National Park. In addition to this, the impact of weather conditions on an Anopheles arabiensis population were evaluated and a range of mosquito collection methods were assessed.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 103 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Tanzania, United Republic of 1 <1%
Unknown 102 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 17%
Researcher 14 14%
Student > Master 14 14%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 26 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 33 32%
Environmental Science 11 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 7%
Social Sciences 4 4%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 25 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 25 November 2022.
All research outputs
#7,008,228
of 24,400,706 outputs
Outputs from Malaria Journal
#1,981
of 5,827 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,426
of 316,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Malaria Journal
#32
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,400,706 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,827 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 316,171 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 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 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 58% of its contemporaries.