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 |
Roles of iron acquisition systems in virulence of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli: salmochelin and aerobactin contribute more to virulence than heme in a chicken infection model
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Microbiology, July 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1471-2180-12-143 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Qingqing Gao, Xiaobo Wang, Huiqing Xu, Yaya Xu, Jielu Ling, Debao Zhang, Song Gao, Xiufan Liu |
| Abstract |
Avian pathogenic Escherichia coli (APEC) and uropathogenic E. coli (UPEC) are the two main subsets of extraintestinal pathogenic E. coli (ExPEC). Both types have multiple iron acquisition systems, including heme and siderophores. Although iron transport systems involved in the pathogenesis of APEC or UPEC have been documented individually in corresponding animal models, the contribution of these systems during simultaneous APEC and UPEC infection is not well described. To determine the contribution of each individual iron acquisition system to the virulence of APEC and UPEC, isogenic mutants affecting iron uptake in APEC E058 and UPEC U17 were constructed and compared in a chicken challenge model. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Slovenia | 1 | <1% |
| Mexico | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 149 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 38 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 15 | 10% |
| Researcher | 14 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 12% |
| Unknown | 37 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 41 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 22 | 14% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 18 | 12% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 15 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 9% |
| Unknown | 38 | 25% |
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 22 July 2012.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from BMC Microbiology
#2,468
of 3,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#139,144
of 177,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Microbiology
#46
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 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 3,489 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 177,938 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.