↓ Skip to main content

Lambs immunized with an inactivated variant of Anaplasma phagocytophilum

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
Lambs immunized with an inactivated variant of Anaplasma phagocytophilum
Published in
Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13028-015-0131-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Snorre Stuen, Wenche Okstad, Karin Artursson, Basima Al-Khedery, Anthony Barbet, Erik G Granquist

Abstract

Anaplasma phagocytophilum (formerly Ehrlichia phagocytophila) is an obligate intracellular bacterium causing the disease tick-borne fever (TBF) in domestic ruminants. An effective vaccine against the infection has been demanded for livestock by sheep farmers and veterinary practitioners for years. In the present study, we immunized lambs with an inactivated suspension of 1 × 10(8) killed A. phagocytophilum organisms mixed with adjuvant (Montanide ISA 61VG; Seppic). Twelve 9-months-old lambs of the Norwegian White Sheep breed were used. A full two-dose series of immunization was given subcutaneously to six lambs with a 4 week interval between injections. One month after the last immunization, all lambs were challenged with the homologous viable variant of A. phagocytophilum. After challenge, all lambs showed clinical responses for several days, although the immunized lambs reacted with an anamnestic response, i.e. significant reduction in infection rate and a significantly higher antibody titer. Immunization with inactivated A. phagocytophilum did not protect lambs TBF.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 4%
Unknown 23 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 17%
Student > Master 3 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 6 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 6 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 21%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 7 29%
Attention Score in Context

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 07 August 2015.
All research outputs
#20,655,488
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica
#552
of 837 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#201,010
of 274,894 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica
#12
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 837 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 274,894 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.