↓ Skip to main content

Blood groups in the species survival plan®, European endangered species program, and managed in situ populations of bonobo (Pan paniscus), common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes), gorilla (Gorilla ssp.)…

Overview of attention for article published in Zoo Biology, September 2010
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 (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 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
Blood groups in the species survival plan®, European endangered species program, and managed in situ populations of bonobo (Pan paniscus), common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes), gorilla (Gorilla ssp.), and orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus ssp.)
Published in
Zoo Biology, September 2010
DOI 10.1002/zoo.20348
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kathryn C. Gamble, Jill A. Moyse, Jessica N. Lovstad, Carole B. Ober, Emma E. Thompson

Abstract

Blood groups of humans and great apes have long been considered similar, although they are not interchangeable between species. In this study, human monoclonal antibody technology was used to assign human ABO blood groups to whole blood samples from great apes housed in North American and European zoos and in situ managed populations, as a practical means to assist blood transfusion situations for these species. From a subset of each of the species (bonobo, common chimpanzee, gorilla, and orangutans), DNA sequence analysis was performed to determine blood group genotype. Bonobo and common chimpanzee populations were predominantly group A, which concurred with historic literature and was confirmed by genotyping. In agreement with historic literature, a smaller number of the common chimpanzees sampled were group O, although this O blood group was more often present in wild-origin animals as compared with zoo-born animals. Gorilla blood groups were inconclusive by monoclonal antibody techniques, and genetic studies were inconsistent with any known human blood group. As the genus and, specifically, the Bornean species, orangutans were identified with all human blood groups, including O, which had not been reported previously. Following this study, it was concluded that blood groups of bonobo, common chimpanzees, and some orangutans can be reliably assessed by human monoclonal antibody technology. However, this technique was not reliable for gorilla or orangutans other than those with blood group A. Even in those species with reliable blood group detection, blood transfusion preparation must include cross-matching to minimize adverse reactions for the patient.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Kenya 1 2%
Czechia 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 40 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 18%
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Other 3 7%
Other 10 23%
Unknown 4 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 25 57%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 11%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 4 9%
Unspecified 1 2%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 4 9%
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 13 December 2023.
All research outputs
#4,652,148
of 24,987,787 outputs
Outputs from Zoo Biology
#185
of 990 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#19,298
of 102,352 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Zoo Biology
#2
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,987,787 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 990 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% 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 102,352 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 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 91% of its contemporaries.