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 |
The use of genetic markers to estimate relationships between dogs in the course of criminal investigations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, August 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-017-2722-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Roberta Ciampolini, Francesca Cecchi, Isabella Spinetti, Anna Rocchi, Filippo Biscarini |
| Abstract |
Attacks on humans by dogs in a pack, though uncommon, do happen, and result in severe, sometimes fatal, injuries. We describe the role that canine genetic markers played during the investigation of a fatal dog-pack attack involving a 50-year-old male truck driver in a parking lot in Tuscany (Italy). Using canine specific STR genetic markers, the local authorities, in the course of their investigations, reconstructed the genetic relationships between the dogs that caused the deadly aggression and other dogs belonging to the owner of the parking who, at the moment of the aggression, was located in another region of Italy. From a Bayesian clustering algorithm, the most likely number of clusters was two. The average relatedness among the dogs responsible for the aggression was higher than the average relatedness among the other dogs or between the two groups. Taken together, all these results indicate that the two groups of dogs are clearly distinct. Genetic relationships showed that the two groups of dogs were not related. It was therefore unlikely that the murderous dogs belonged to the owner of the parking lot who, on grounds of this and additional evidence, was eventually acquitted. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Egypt | 1 | 33% |
| Spain | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 26% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 16% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Librarian | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 21% |
| Unknown | 3 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 21% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 21% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 11% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Unknown | 5 | 26% |
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 03 August 2023.
All research outputs
#19,844,731
of 25,262,379 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#3,035
of 4,500 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,533
of 324,847 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#82
of 139 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,262,379 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,500 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 324,847 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 139 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.