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 |
Successful establishment of Wolbachia in Aedes populations to suppress dengue transmission
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature, August 2011
|
| DOI | 10.1038/nature10356 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A. A. Hoffmann, B. L. Montgomery, J. Popovici, I. Iturbe-Ormaetxe, P. H. Johnson, F. Muzzi, M. Greenfield, M. Durkan, Y. S. Leong, Y. Dong, H. Cook, J. Axford, A. G. Callahan, N. Kenny, C. Omodei, E. A. McGraw, P. A. Ryan, S. A. Ritchie, M. Turelli, S. L. O’Neill |
| Abstract |
Genetic manipulations of insect populations for pest control have been advocated for some time, but there are few cases where manipulated individuals have been released in the field and no cases where they have successfully invaded target populations. Population transformation using the intracellular bacterium Wolbachia is particularly attractive because this maternally-inherited agent provides a powerful mechanism to invade natural populations through cytoplasmic incompatibility. When Wolbachia are introduced into mosquitoes, they interfere with pathogen transmission and influence key life history traits such as lifespan. Here we describe how the wMel Wolbachia infection, introduced into the dengue vector Aedes aegypti from Drosophila melanogaster, successfully invaded two natural A. aegypti populations in Australia, reaching near-fixation in a few months following releases of wMel-infected A. aegypti adults. Models with plausible parameter values indicate that Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes suffered relatively small fitness costs, leading to an unstable equilibrium frequency <30% that must be exceeded for invasion. These findings demonstrate that Wolbachia-based strategies can be deployed as a practical approach to dengue suppression with potential for area-wide implementation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 25 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 | 3 | 12% |
| Brazil | 3 | 12% |
| Japan | 2 | 8% |
| Sweden | 1 | 4% |
| Spain | 1 | 4% |
| Portugal | 1 | 4% |
| Paraguay | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 13 | 52% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 21 | 84% |
| Scientists | 3 | 12% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1,290 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 27 | 2% |
| Brazil | 11 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 6 | <1% |
| Australia | 3 | <1% |
| Germany | 3 | <1% |
| Japan | 3 | <1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Mexico | 2 | <1% |
| Other | 16 | 1% |
| Unknown | 1215 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 262 | 20% |
| Researcher | 213 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 183 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 176 | 14% |
| Other | 56 | 4% |
| Other | 209 | 16% |
| Unknown | 191 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 583 | 45% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 160 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 95 | 7% |
| Environmental Science | 52 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 47 | 4% |
| Other | 130 | 10% |
| Unknown | 223 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 427. 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 29 February 2024.
All research outputs
#68,266
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#5,184
of 99,074 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196
of 138,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#11
of 876 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 99,074 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 102.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 138,791 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 876 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.