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 |
Prevalence and genetic variability of Anaplasma phagocytophilum in wild rodents from the Italian alps
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Parasites & Vectors, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13071-017-2221-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Fausta Rosso, Valentina Tagliapietra, Ivana Baráková, Marketa Derdáková, Adam Konečný, Heidi Christine Hauffe, Annapaola Rizzoli |
| Abstract |
Human granulocytic anaplasmosis is a zoonotic bacterial disease with increasing relevance for public health in Europe. The understanding of its sylvatic cycle and identification of competent reservoir hosts are essential for improving disease risk models and planning preventative measures. In 2012 we collected single ear biopsy punches from 964 live-trapped rodents in the Province of Trento, Italy. Genetic screening for Anaplasma phagocytophilum (AP) was carried out by PCR amplification of a fragment of the 16S rRNA gene. Fifty-two (5.4%) samples tested positive: 49/245 (20%) from the bank vole (Myodes glareolus) and 3/685 (0.4%) samples collected from the yellow-necked mouse (Apodemus flavicollis). From these 52 positive samples, we generated 38 groEL and 39 msp4 sequences. Phylogenetic analysis confirmed the existence of a distinct rodent strain of AP. Our results confirm the circulation of a specific strain of AP in rodents in our study area; moreover, they provide further evidence of the marginal role of A. flavicollis compared to M. glareolus as a reservoir host for this pathogen. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 49 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 22% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 11 | 22% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 18% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 10% |
| Unknown | 13 | 27% |
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 15 March 2018.
All research outputs
#14,351,475
of 22,981,247 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#2,839
of 5,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,120
of 317,509 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#88
of 143 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,981,247 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 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 is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 317,509 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 143 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.