↓ Skip to main content

Microbiomes of the dust particles collected from the International Space Station and Spacecraft Assembly Facilities

Overview of attention for article published in Microbiome, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#22 of 1,792)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
42 news outlets
blogs
9 blogs
twitter
63 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
googleplus
7 Google+ users
reddit
2 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
162 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
257 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
Microbiomes of the dust particles collected from the International Space Station and Spacecraft Assembly Facilities
Published in
Microbiome, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40168-015-0116-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aleksandra Checinska, Alexander J. Probst, Parag Vaishampayan, James R. White, Deepika Kumar, Victor G. Stepanov, George E. Fox, Henrik R. Nilsson, Duane L. Pierson, Jay Perry, Kasthuri Venkateswaran

Abstract

The International Space Station (ISS) is a unique built environment due to the effects of microgravity, space radiation, elevated carbon dioxide levels, and especially continuous human habitation. Understanding the composition of the ISS microbial community will facilitate further development of safety and maintenance practices. The primary goal of this study was to characterize the viable microbiome of the ISS-built environment. A second objective was to determine if the built environments of Earth-based cleanrooms associated with space exploration are an appropriate model of the ISS environment. Samples collected from the ISS and two cleanrooms at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL, Pasadena, CA) were analyzed by traditional cultivation, adenosine triphosphate (ATP), and propidium monoazide-quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PMA-qPCR) assays to estimate viable microbial populations. The 16S rRNA gene Illumina iTag sequencing was used to elucidate microbial diversity and explore differences between ISS and cleanroom microbiomes. Statistical analyses showed that members of the phyla Actinobacteria, Firmicutes, and Proteobacteria were dominant in the samples examined but varied in abundance. Actinobacteria were predominant in the ISS samples whereas Proteobacteria, least abundant in the ISS, dominated in the cleanroom samples. The viable bacterial populations seen by PMA treatment were greatly decreased. However, the treatment did not appear to have an effect on the bacterial composition (diversity) associated with each sampling site. The results of this study provide strong evidence that specific human skin-associated microorganisms make a substantial contribution to the ISS microbiome, which is not the case in Earth-based cleanrooms. For example, Corynebacterium and Propionibacterium (Actinobacteria) but not Staphylococcus (Firmicutes) species are dominant on the ISS in terms of viable and total bacterial community composition. The results obtained will facilitate future studies to determine how stable the ISS environment is over time. The present results also demonstrate the value of measuring viable cell diversity and population size at any sampling site. This information can be used to identify sites that can be targeted for more stringent cleaning. Finally, the results will allow comparisons with other built sites and facilitate future improvements on the ISS that will ensure astronaut health.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 63 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 257 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Unknown 250 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 53 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 52 20%
Student > Bachelor 34 13%
Student > Master 20 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 7%
Other 34 13%
Unknown 45 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 67 26%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 37 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 26 10%
Engineering 17 7%
Environmental Science 13 5%
Other 39 15%
Unknown 58 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 432. 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 02 November 2021.
All research outputs
#67,274
of 25,773,273 outputs
Outputs from Microbiome
#22
of 1,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#795
of 296,161 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Microbiome
#1
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,773,273 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,792 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 296,161 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.