↓ Skip to main content

Isolation and identification of bacteria from marine market fish Scomberomorus guttatus (Bloch and Schneider, 1801) from Madurai district, Tamil Nadu, India

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Parasitic Diseases, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
Isolation and identification of bacteria from marine market fish Scomberomorus guttatus (Bloch and Schneider, 1801) from Madurai district, Tamil Nadu, India
Published in
Journal of Parasitic Diseases, December 2014
DOI 10.1007/s12639-014-0634-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

M. Karthiga Rani, G. Chelladurai, G. Jayanthi

Abstract

The present study was conducted to evaluate the hygienic quality and freshness of fish Indo-pacific King Mackerel "Scomberomorus guttatus" through the investigation of the occurrence of bacteria which is an indicator for fish quality. Fishes were collected every fortnight from Madurai fish market on monthly twice of January 2014 to March 2014. Skin surface of the fish was examined. Escherichia coli, Proteus vulgaris, Bacillus subtilis, Klebsiella pneumonia, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Staphylococcus aureus were identified by Biochemical tests (IMViC Tests). Among the six bacterial species E. coli and K. pneumonia were found in all the collected samples where as other bacterial species were not found. The result of this study revealed that raw fish sold in Madurai fish market has high contamination so the presence of the bacterial species has strongly suggested the urgent need to improve the quality control systems in Madurai fish market.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Student > Master 4 7%
Researcher 3 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 25 45%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 9%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 7%
Materials Science 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 27 49%
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 09 September 2016.
All research outputs
#14,860,134
of 22,886,568 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Parasitic Diseases
#97
of 432 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,469
of 353,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Parasitic Diseases
#4
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,886,568 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 432 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% 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 353,619 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.