↓ Skip to main content

Social group size affects Mycobacterium bovis infection in European badgers (Meles meles)

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Animal Ecology, June 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
250 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
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
Social group size affects Mycobacterium bovis infection in European badgers (Meles meles)
Published in
Journal of Animal Ecology, June 2009
DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2009.01545.x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rosie Woodroffe, Christl A. Donnelly, Gao Wei, D.R. Cox, F. John Bourne, Terry Burke, Roger K. Butlin, C.L. Cheeseman, George Gettinby, Peter Gilks, Simon Hedges, Helen E. Jenkins, W. Thomas Johnston, John P. McInerney, W. Ivan Morrison, Lisa C. Pope

Abstract

1. In most social animals, the prevalence of directly transmitted pathogens increases in larger groups and at higher population densities. Such patterns are predicted by models of Mycobacterium bovis infection in European badgers (Meles meles). 2. We investigated the relationship between badger abundance and M. bovis prevalence, using data on 2696 adult badgers in 10 populations sampled at the start of the Randomized Badger Culling Trial. 3. M. bovis prevalence was consistently higher at low badger densities and in small social groups. M. bovis prevalence was also higher among badgers whose genetic profiles suggested that they had immigrated into their assigned social groups. 4. The association between high M. bovis prevalence and small badger group size appeared not to have been caused by previous small-scale culling in study areas, which had been suspended, on average, 5 years before the start of the current study. 5. The observed pattern of prevalence might occur through badgers in smaller groups interacting more frequently with members of neighbouring groups; detailed behavioural data are needed to test this hypothesis. Likewise, longitudinal data are needed to determine whether the size of infected groups might be suppressed by disease-related mortality. 6. Although M. bovis prevalence was lower at high population densities, the absolute number of infected badgers was higher. However, this does not necessarily mean that the risk of M. bovis transmission to cattle is highest at high badger densities, since transmission risk depends on badger behaviour as well as on badger density.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 250 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 7 3%
United States 3 1%
France 3 1%
Brazil 3 1%
India 2 <1%
Norway 1 <1%
United Arab Emirates 1 <1%
Kenya 1 <1%
South Africa 1 <1%
Other 9 4%
Unknown 219 88%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 56 22%
Researcher 55 22%
Student > Master 30 12%
Student > Bachelor 28 11%
Other 16 6%
Other 45 18%
Unknown 20 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 135 54%
Environmental Science 41 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 5%
Social Sciences 7 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 2%
Other 23 9%
Unknown 26 10%
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 06 August 2020.
All research outputs
#15,540,313
of 24,627,841 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Animal Ecology
#2,725
of 3,161 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,410
of 118,908 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Animal Ecology
#14
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,627,841 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,161 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.4. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 118,908 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 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.