↓ Skip to main content

The evolution of trypanosomatid taxonomy

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
101 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
371 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
The evolution of trypanosomatid taxonomy
Published in
Parasites & Vectors, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13071-017-2204-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alexa Kaufer, John Ellis, Damien Stark, Joel Barratt

Abstract

Trypanosomatids are protozoan parasites of the class Kinetoplastida predominately restricted to invertebrate hosts (i.e. possess a monoxenous life-cycle). However, several genera are pathogenic to humans, animals and plants, and have an invertebrate vector that facilitates their transmission (i.e. possess a dixenous life-cycle). Phytomonas is one dixenous genus that includes several plant pathogens transmitted by phytophagous insects. Trypanosoma and Leishmania are dixenous genera that infect vertebrates, including humans, and are transmitted by hematophagous invertebrates. Traditionally, monoxenous trypanosomatids such as Leptomonas were distinguished from morphologically similar dixenous species based on their restriction to an invertebrate host. Nonetheless, this criterion is somewhat flawed as exemplified by Leptomonas seymouri which reportedly infects vertebrates opportunistically. Similarly, Novymonas and Zelonia are presumably monoxenous genera yet sit comfortably in the dixenous clade occupied by Leishmania. The isolation of Leishmania macropodum from a biting midge (Forcipomyia spp.) rather than a phlebotomine sand fly calls into question the exclusivity of the Leishmania-sand fly relationship, and its suitability for defining the Leishmania genus. It is now accepted that classic genus-defining characteristics based on parasite morphology and host range are insufficient to form the sole basis of trypanosomatid taxonomy as this has led to several instances of paraphyly. While improvements have been made, resolution of evolutionary relationships within the Trypanosomatidae is confounded by our incomplete knowledge of its true diversity. The known trypanosomatids probably represent a fraction of those that exist and isolation of new species will help resolve relationships in this group with greater accuracy. This review incites a dialogue on how our understanding of the relationships between certain trypanosomatids has shifted, and discusses new knowledge that informs the present taxonomy of these important parasites.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 371 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 371 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 76 20%
Student > Master 56 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 49 13%
Researcher 33 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 25 7%
Other 50 13%
Unknown 82 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 97 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 73 20%
Immunology and Microbiology 28 8%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 16 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 4%
Other 43 12%
Unknown 101 27%

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 30 June 2017.
All research outputs
#3,806,304
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#819
of 5,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,713
of 317,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#30
of 149 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 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 5,489 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 done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 317,335 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 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 149 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.