↓ Skip to main content

Virulence difference between the prototypic Schu S4 strain (A1a) and Francisella tularensisA1a, A1b, A2 and type B strains in a murine model of infection

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Infectious Diseases, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
30 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
Virulence difference between the prototypic Schu S4 strain (A1a) and Francisella tularensisA1a, A1b, A2 and type B strains in a murine model of infection
Published in
BMC Infectious Diseases, February 2014
DOI 10.1186/1471-2334-14-67
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claudia R Molins, Mark J Delorey, Brook M Yockey, John W Young, John T Belisle, Martin E Schriefer, Jeannine M Petersen

Abstract

The use of prototypic strains is common among laboratories studying infectious agents as it promotes consistency for data comparability among and between laboratories. Schu S4 is the prototypic virulent strain of Francisella tularensis and has been used extensively as such over the past six decades. Studies have demonstrated virulence differences among the two clinically relevant subspecies of F. tularensis, tularensis (type A) and holarctica (type B) and more recently between type A subpopulations (A1a, A1b and A2). Schu S4 belongs to the most virulent subspecies of F. tularensis, subspecies tularensis.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Sweden 1 3%
Unknown 28 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 27%
Researcher 6 20%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 13%
Professor 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 9 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 17%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 7%
Other 2 7%
Unknown 7 23%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 20 February 2014.
All research outputs
#9,906,006
of 12,373,180 outputs
Outputs from BMC Infectious Diseases
#3,262
of 4,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#129,372
of 190,474 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Infectious Diseases
#18
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,373,180 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,592 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% 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 190,474 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.