| Title |
Comparative Characteristics of Discrimination of S. enterica Isolates by Phagotyping Test and Dienes Test
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10517-018-4081-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
V. N. Afonyushkin, Yu. N. Kozlova, I. N. Tromenshleger, M. L. Filipenko, O. B. Novikova |
| Abstract |
We propose an original methodological approach to discrimination of newly isolated Salmonella enterica strains with the use of Dienes test. Dienes test is used for identification of P. vulgaris and P. mirabilis strains. It consists in growth suppression by mobile bacterial strain cultures and the formation of a demarcation line (Dienes line) between the strains growing towards each other. Similarities and differences between salmonella phagotyping method and Dienes test-based discrimination of the strains are detected. The studied sample of salmonellas was divided into 12 phagotypes. Cluster analysis has shown that most of the salmonella strains could not be clusterized by both methods. Discrimination by different methods has shown that the largest clusters contain the same strains. Clusterization of salmonella strains by different methods shows moderate congruency. Rand index used for comparison of the results of the sample clusterization by different methods is 0.88. High heterogeneity of salmonella strains is presumably explained by heterogeneity of antagonism factors within the S. enterica species. Intraspecies antagonism is essential for limitation of the horizontal gene transfer in closely related strains and for increase of the genetic heterogeneity of salmonella population in the host. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 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 1 Mendeley reader of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 100% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 100% |
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 17 April 2018.
All research outputs
#19,702,729
of 24,217,893 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine
#765
of 1,357 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#234,895
of 300,243 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of Experimental Biology and Medicine
#13
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,217,893 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,357 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 300,243 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.