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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Anaplasma marginale and A. phagocytophilum in cattle in Tunisia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Parasites & Vectors, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13071-016-1840-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Youmna M’ghirbi, Marwa Bèji, Beatriz Oporto, Fatma Khrouf, Ana Hurtado, Ali Bouattour |
| Abstract |
Tick-borne diseases caused by Anaplasma species put serious constraints on the health and production of domestic cattle in tropical and sub-tropical regions. After recovering from a primary infection, cattle typically become persistent carriers of pathogens and play a critical role in the epidemiology of the disease, acting as reservoirs of the Anaplasma spp. In this study a duplex PCR assay was used for the simultaneous detection of Anaplasma marginale and Anaplasma phagocytophilum in cattle using two primer pairs targeting msp4 and msp2 genes, respectively. We used this method to analyze DNA preparations derived from 328 blood cattle samples that were collected from 80 farms distributed among Tunisia's four bioclimatic zones. The prevalence of the A. marginale infection (24.7 %) was significantly higher and more widespread (in all bioclimatic areas) than that of A. phagocytophilum (0.6 %), which was found in a mixed infection with A. marginale. The duplex PCR assay used proved to be a rapid, specific and inexpensive mean for the simultaneous detection of Anaplasma marginale and Anaplasma phagocytophilum in cattle blood. It allowed us to report the identification of A. phagocytophilum for the first time in cattle in Tunisia and confirm the presence of A. marginale in cattle from several geographical areas of the country. Further epidemiological studies undertaken using this assay will help improve the surveillance of the associated diseases in the regions where they are endemic. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 96 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 12 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 10% |
| Researcher | 9 | 9% |
| Lecturer | 7 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 15% |
| Unknown | 39 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 27 | 28% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 17 | 18% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 2 | 2% |
| Unknown | 41 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 06 August 2021.
All research outputs
#4,750,103
of 22,999,744 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#1,070
of 5,499 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,417
of 316,491 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#19
of 104 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,999,744 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 76th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,499 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 80% 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 316,491 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 104 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.