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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Molecular investigation of tick-borne pathogens in dogs from Luanda, Angola
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Parasites & Vectors, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13071-016-1536-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Luís Cardoso, Ana Cristina Oliveira, Sara Granada, Yaarit Nachum-Biala, Matan Gilad, Ana Patrícia Lopes, Sérgio Ramalho Sousa, Hugo Vilhena, Gad Baneth |
| Abstract |
No molecular data have been available on tick-borne pathogens that infect dogs from Angola. The occurrence of agents from the genera Anaplasma, Babesia, Ehrlichia and Hepatozoon was assessed in 103 domestic dogs from Luanda, by means of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and DNA sequence analysis. Forty-six dogs (44.7 %) were positive for at least one pathogen. Twenty-one animals (20.4 %) were found infected with Anaplasma platys, 18 (17.5 %) with Hepatozoon canis, six (5.8 %) with Ehrlichia canis, six (5.8 %) with Babesia vogeli, one (1.0 %) with Babesia gibsoni and one (1.0 %) with an unnamed Babesia sp. The molecular frequency of single infections taken together was 37.9 % and that of co-infections with several combinations of two pathogens accounted for 6.8 % of the animals. This is the first report of A. platys, B. vogeli, B. gibsoni, E. canis and H. canis infections diagnosed by PCR in domestic dogs from Angola. The present study provides evidence that dogs in Luanda are widely exposed to, and at risk of becoming infected with, tick-borne pathogens. Further investigation is needed, including a larger number of animals, canine populations from other cities and provinces of the country, as well as potential vector ticks, aiming at better characterizing and controlling canine vector-borne diseases in Angola. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 3 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 59 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 12% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 13 | 22% |
| Unknown | 18 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 17 | 29% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 21 | 36% |
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 23 May 2017.
All research outputs
#15,373,286
of 22,870,727 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#3,388
of 5,473 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#184,220
of 305,000 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#109
of 174 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,870,727 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,473 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 305,000 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 174 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.