↓ Skip to main content

Contributions to the morphology and phylogeny of the newly discovered bat tick species, Ixodes ariadnae in comparison with I. vespertilionis and I. simplex

Overview of attention for article published in Parasites & Vectors, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
40 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
Contributions to the morphology and phylogeny of the newly discovered bat tick species, Ixodes ariadnae in comparison with I. vespertilionis and I. simplex
Published in
Parasites & Vectors, January 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13071-015-0665-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sándor Hornok, Jenő Kontschán, Agustín Estrada-Peña, Isabel G Fernández de Mera, Snežana Tomanović, José de la Fuente

Abstract

BackgroundRecently a new hard tick species, Ixodes ariadnae has been discovered, adding to the two known ixodid tick species (I. vespertilionis and I. simplex) of bats in Europe.FindingsScanning electron microscopic comparison of adult females of these species shows morphological differences concerning the palps, the scutum, the Haller¿s organ, the coxae, as well as the arrangement and fine structure of setae. Molecular analysis of 10 geographically different isolates revealed 90-95% sequence homology in the 12S and 16S rDNA genes of bat tick species. Based on 12S rDNA sequences, genotypes of I. ariadnae clustered closest to I. simplex, whereas according to their 16S rDNA gene they were closest to I. vespertilionis. The subolesin gene of I. ariadnae had only 91% sequence homology with that of I. ricinus, and is the longest known among hard tick species.ConclusionsThe present study illustrates the morphology and clarifies the phylogenetic relationships of the three known bat tick species that occur in Europe. According to its subolesin gene I. ariadnae may have a long evolutionary history.

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 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 3%
Unknown 39 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 25%
Researcher 9 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 13%
Professor 4 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 45%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 15%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 5 13%
Environmental Science 1 3%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 8 20%

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 27 January 2015.
All research outputs
#11,069,876
of 12,451,686 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#2,804
of 3,208 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,393
of 267,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#116
of 146 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,451,686 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,208 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 267,556 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 146 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.