↓ Skip to main content

The immune mechanism of Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae 168 vaccine strain through dendritic cells

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 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 immune mechanism of Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae 168 vaccine strain through dendritic cells
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, September 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12917-017-1194-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yumeng Shen, Weiwei Hu, Yanna Wei, Zhixin Feng, Qian Yang

Abstract

Mycoplasma hyopneumoniae (Mhp) causes porcine enzootic pneumonia, a disease that cause major economic losses in the pig industry. Dendritic cells (DCs), the most effective antigen-presenting cells, are widely distributed beneath respiratory epithelium, DCs uptake and present antigens to T cells, to initiate protective immune responses in different infections. In this study, we investigated the role of porcine DCs in vaccine Mhp-168 exposure. The antigen presenting ability of DCs were improved by vaccine Mhp-168 exposure. DCs could activate T-cell proliferation by up-regulating the antigen presenting molecule MHCII expression and co-stimulatory molecule CD80/86. However, the up-regulation of IL-10 and accompany with down-regulation of IFN-γ gene level may account for the limitation of attenuated Mhp-168 strain use as vaccine alone. These findings are benefit for exploring the protection mechanisms and the possible limitations of this attenuated Mhp-168 vaccine.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 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 4 21%
Student > Master 4 21%
Student > Bachelor 2 11%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 6 32%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 21%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Mathematics 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 3 16%

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 18 February 2018.
All research outputs
#7,554,348
of 12,526,930 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#711
of 1,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#141,225
of 266,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#18
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,526,930 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,773 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 266,520 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.