↓ Skip to main content

Improved methods for isolation of avian influenza virus

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Virological Methods, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
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
Improved methods for isolation of avian influenza virus
Published in
Journal of Virological Methods, September 2014
DOI 10.1016/j.jviromet.2014.09.015
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shuang Tang, Yongdong Li, Han Xia, Juan Huang, Zhong Zhang, Na Zhu, Jiuru Zhao, Tianxian Li

Abstract

Isolation of viruses using chick embryos is a classical virological method. Inoculation of the allantoic cavity and use of allantoic fluid is a common method of passaging isolated avian influenza viruses. In the present study, 2490 fresh fecal samples and 4967 old fecal samples were investigated and subjected to conventional passaging (allantoic fluid method). Two newly developed methods-the allantochorion and allantoic fluid mixed method and the chick embryo and allantoic fluid mixed method-were also examined. The rates of influenza virus isolation for these three methods were compared. There appeared to be little difference among these methods when fresh fecal samples were used. However, for the old fecal samples, isolation rates for influenza virus were significantly higher for the chick embryo and allantoic fluid mixed method compared with the conventional allantoic fluid method. All viruses isolated using the conventional allantoic fluid method were isolated successfully using the two newly developed methods. These results suggest that using chick embryos in conjunction with allantoic fluid is effective for early virus isolation, especially for fecal samples that are not fresh. Additionally, practical chick embryo passage methods are described that improve significantly the rate of isolation of influenza viruses from fecal samples of migratory birds in a complex wild ecological environment.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 5%
Unknown 18 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 3 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 16%
Student > Master 3 16%
Researcher 2 11%
Other 1 5%
Other 4 21%
Unknown 3 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 32%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 11%
Unspecified 1 5%
Environmental Science 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 3 16%
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 29 September 2014.
All research outputs
#16,721,717
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Virological Methods
#2,467
of 3,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,714
of 263,753 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Virological Methods
#16
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,282 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 263,753 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.