↓ Skip to main content

Conjunctival flora of clinically normal and diseased turtles and tortoises

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 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
Conjunctival flora of clinically normal and diseased turtles and tortoises
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12917-015-0405-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Francesco Di Ianni, Pier Luigi Dodi, Clotilde Silvia Cabassi, Igor Pelizzone, Andrea Sala, Sandro Cavirani, Enrico Parmigiani, Fausto Quintavalla, Simone Taddei

Abstract

In captive breed turtles and tortoises conjunctival disease is common. Our aim was to investigate the bacterial and fungal flora present in the eyes of healthy and pathological chelonians and to compare findings in turtles with those in tortoises. Samples were taken from the conjunctival sacs of 34, diseased and healthy, chelonians (18 tortoises and 16 turtles) and submitted to bacterial and fungal investigation. All samples showed bacterial growth. Thirteen animals (38%), harboured a single bacterial species as sole isolate and twenty-one animals (62%) harboured more than one species. Detection of multiple bacterial infection was clearly greater in tortoises compared to turtles. Most frequently isolated bacterial species were Bacillus spp. (13 isolates), Staphylococcus xylosus (10 isolates), Sphingomonas paucimobilis (6 isolates), Staphylococcus sciuri and Aeromonas hydrophila/caviae (each 5 isolates), Ochrobactrum anthropi (3 isolates), Citrobacter freundii, Enterobacter cloacae and Pseudomonas luteola (each 2 isolates). Only one isolate of Kocuria varians/rosea, Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus auricularis, Staphylococcus haemolyticus, Staphylococcus lentus, Morganella morganii, Pasteurella multocida, Pasteurella pneumotropica/haemolytica, Proteus spp., Pseudomonas putida, Salmonella enterica ssp. arizonae, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia and Vibrio parahaemolyticus was evidenced. The presence in 8 animals of Mycoplasma spp. and in 1 animal with severe conjunctivitis of Chlamydia spp. was detected by PCR. Candida spp. was also isolated from two healthy animals. A clear predominance of Gram positive isolates in tortoises and Gram negative isolates in turtles was found. However, we cannot ascribe the observed difference to the diversity of animal species, as other factors, including especially different characteristics of the living environments, may play a role. Almost all bacterial species isolated may have clinical significance, mostly as opportunistic pathogens, both for humans and animals. That chelonians are often carrier of bacteria with zoonotic potential is a well-known fact, in particular with regard to Salmonella spp. Therefore, it is not surprising the detection of a strain of Salmonella enterica ssp. arizonae in the eye of one of the animals tested. Worthy of note is the finding of Chlamydia spp. in a severe case of conjunctivitis, though we cannot epidemiologically assess a cause-effect relationship between presence of chlamydia and disease.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 17%
Researcher 10 16%
Other 7 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Other 8 13%
Unknown 16 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 16 25%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 11 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Environmental Science 2 3%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 19 30%
Attention Score in Context

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 16 February 2016.
All research outputs
#13,432,116
of 22,799,071 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#942
of 3,050 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,769
of 264,200 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#18
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,799,071 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,050 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 264,200 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 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 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 67% of its contemporaries.