| Title |
Cryptosporidium spp. Contamination in Perna perna Mussels Destined for Human Consumption in Southeastern Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00128-017-2223-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
A. L. Santos, L. T. F. de Oliveira, A. L. A. Souza, R. A. Hauser-Davis, S. G. De Simone |
| Abstract |
Cryptosporidium spp. has been recognized as an important pathogen. As bivalve mollusks are noted as potential sources of several pathogens due to their consumption as foodstuffs, the aim of this study was to investigate the occurrence of Cryptosporidium spp. oocysts in Perna perna mussels and in seawater samples from a mussel farm in Southeastern Brazil, where mussels are grown directly in the sea, attached to ropes. Oocysts were observed by microscopy and confirmed by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Oocysts were present in mussel gills and GI tracts, as well as in the seawater. Of the 100 females, 10% and 11% showed contaminated GI tracts and gills, respectively, while this rate was lower in males, at 5% and 8.9%. Oocysts were present in higher amounts in the GI tract compared to gills and water. Contamination of the study area is apparent, leading to public health risks. More in-depth studies are needed, including molecular investigations, to identify Cryptosporidium species in mussels, as well as the implementation of monitoring actions in animals destined for human consumption. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 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 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 29 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 11 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 7% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 7% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Unknown | 14 | 48% |
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 07 February 2018.
All research outputs
#21,608,038
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#3,090
of 4,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#381,395
of 445,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#34
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,112 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 445,990 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.