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 |
Avian Influenza Virus Antibodies in Pacific Coast Red Knots (Calidris canutus roselaari)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Wildlife Diseases, May 2014
|
| DOI | 10.7589/2013-04-016 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
James A. Johnson, Lucas H. DeCicco, Daniel R. Ruthrauff, Scott Krauss, Jeffrey S. Hall |
| Abstract |
Abstract Prevalence of avian influenza virus (AIV) antibodies in the western Atlantic subspecies of Red Knot (Calidris canutus rufa) is among the highest for any shorebird. To assess whether the frequency of detection of AIV antibodies is high for the species in general or restricted only to C. c. rufa, we sampled the northeastern Pacific Coast subspecies of Red Knot (Calidris canutus roselaari) breeding in northwestern Alaska. Antibodies were detected in 90% of adults and none of the chicks sampled. Viral shedding was not detected in adults or chicks. These results suggest a predisposition of Red Knots to AIV infection. High antibody titers to subtypes H3 and H4 were detected, whereas low to intermediate antibody levels were found for subtypes H10 and H11. These four subtypes have previously been detected in shorebirds at Delaware Bay (at the border of New Jersey and Delaware) and in waterfowl along the Pacific Coast of North America. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 32 | 91% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 12 | 34% |
| Other | 9 | 26% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 3 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 11 | 31% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 26% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 8 | 23% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 4 | 11% |
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 15 May 2014.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Wildlife Diseases
#1,427
of 1,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,072
of 241,930 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Wildlife Diseases
#21
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 1,786 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 241,930 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 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.