| Title |
Tick community composition in Midwestern US habitats in relation to sampling method and environmental conditions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Experimental and Applied Acarology, April 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10493-014-9798-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Evelyn C. Rynkiewicz, Keith Clay |
| Abstract |
The ranges of many tick species are changing due to climate change and human alteration of the landscape. Understanding tick responses to environmental conditions and how sampling method influences measurement of tick communities will improve our assessment of human disease risk. We compared tick sampling by three collection methods (dragging, CO2 trapping and rodent surveys) in adjacent forested and grassland habitats in the lower Midwest, USA, and analyzed the relationship between tick abundance and microclimate conditions. The study areas were within the overlapping ranges of three tick species, which may provide conditions for pathogen exchange and spread into new vectors. Dermacentor variabilis (American dog tick) was found using all methods, Amblyomma americanum (lonestar tick) was found by dragging and CO2 trapping and Ixodes scapularis (blacklegged deer tick) was found only on rodents. Proportion of each species differed significantly among sampling methods. More ticks were found in forests compared to open habitats. Further, more ticks were collected by dragging and from rodents in hotter, drier conditions. Our results demonstrate that multiple sampling methodologies better measure the tick community and that microclimate conditions strongly influence the abundance and activity of individual tick species. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 60 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 15 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 21 | 33% |
| Environmental Science | 7 | 11% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 5 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 19 | 30% |
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 13 September 2014.
All research outputs
#18,782,277
of 23,942,155 outputs
Outputs from Experimental and Applied Acarology
#581
of 919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,487
of 229,497 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental and Applied Acarology
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,942,155 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 919 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 229,497 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.