↓ Skip to main content

Swimming, Swarming, Twitching, and Chemotactic Responses of Cupriavidus metallidurans CH34 and Pseudomonas putida mt2 in the Presence of Cadmium

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
Title
Swimming, Swarming, Twitching, and Chemotactic Responses of Cupriavidus metallidurans CH34 and Pseudomonas putida mt2 in the Presence of Cadmium
Published in
Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, December 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00244-013-9966-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Saba Shamim, Abdul Rehman, Mahmood Hussain Qazi

Abstract

To use of microorganisms for bioremediation purposes, the study of their motility behavior toward metals is essential. In the present study, Cupriavidus metallidurans CH34 and Pseudomonas putida mt2 were used as cadmium (Cd)-resistant and -sensitive bacteria, respectively, to evaluate the effects of Cd on their motility behaviors. Potassium morpholinopropane sulfonate (MOPS) buffer was used to observe the motility behavior of both isolates. Movement of mt2 was less in MOPS buffer compared with CH34, likely reflecting the mono-flagellated nature of mt2 and the peritrichous nature of CH34. The swimming, swarming, twitching, and chemotaxis behaviors of mt2 were greater in the presence of glucose than that of Cd. mt2 exhibited negative motility behaviors when exposed to Cd, but the opposite effect was seen in CH34. Cd was found to be a chemorepellent for mt2 but a chemoattractant for CH34, suggesting that CH34 is a potential candidate for metal (Cd) bioremediation.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 4 18%
Researcher 4 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 18%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 9%
Other 3 14%
Unknown 3 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 41%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 14%
Chemical Engineering 1 5%
Sports and Recreations 1 5%
Chemistry 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 6 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 21 July 2014.
All research outputs
#4,400,523
of 23,806,312 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#227
of 2,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,890
of 311,476 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#1
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,806,312 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,093 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 311,476 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 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 92% of its contemporaries.