↓ Skip to main content

Isolation and identification of Acanthamoeba strains from soil and tap water in Yanji, China

Overview of attention for article published in Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
Title
Isolation and identification of Acanthamoeba strains from soil and tap water in Yanji, China
Published in
Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12199-017-0655-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yinghua Xuan, Yanqin Shen, Yuxi Ge, Gen Yan, Shanzi Zheng

Abstract

Members of the genus Acanthamoeba are widely distributed throughout the world, and some of them are considered pathogenic, as they are capable of causing corneal and central nervous system diseases. In this study, we isolated Acanthamoeba strains from soil and tap water in Yanji, China. We identified four strains of Acanthamoeba (CJY/S1, CJY/S2, CJY/S3, and CJY/W1) using mitochondrial DNA restriction fragment length polymorphism (mtDNA RFLP) analysis. Nuclear 18S rDNA sequences were used for phylogenetic analysis and species identification. Genotypic characterization of the isolates showed that they belonged to genotypes T4 (CJY/S1 and CJY/S2), T5 (CJY/S3), and T16 (CJY/W1). Sequence differences between CJY/S1 and Acanthamoeba castellanii Neff, CJY/S2 and Acanthamoeba KA/E7, and CJY/S3 and Acanthamoeba lenticulata 68-2 were 0.31, 0.2, and 0.26%, respectively. 18S ribosomal deoxyribonucleic acid (rDNA) of CJY/W1 had 99% sequence identity to that of Acanthamoeba sp. U/H-C1. Strains CJY/S1 and CJY/S2, isolated from soil, had similar mtDNA RFLP patterns, whereas strain CJY/W1, isolated from tap water, displayed a different pattern. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report on the identification of genotypes T4, T5, and T16 from environmental sources in Yanji, China.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 34 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 24%
Student > Bachelor 5 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 12%
Lecturer 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 9 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 7 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 15%
Environmental Science 3 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 13 38%
Attention Score in Context

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 23 November 2017.
All research outputs
#17,920,654
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine
#353
of 490 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#225,655
of 314,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine
#6
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 490 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.6. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% 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 314,537 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.