↓ Skip to main content

Flying-Fox Roost Disturbance and Hendra Virus Spillover Risk

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, May 2015
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 (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (91st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
9 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
77 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
Flying-Fox Roost Disturbance and Hendra Virus Spillover Risk
Published in
PLOS ONE, May 2015
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0125881
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel Edson, Hume Field, Lee McMichael, David Jordan, Nina Kung, David Mayer, Craig Smith

Abstract

Bats of the genus Pteropus (flying-foxes) are the natural host of Hendra virus (HeV) which periodically causes fatal disease in horses and humans in Australia. The increased urban presence of flying-foxes often provokes negative community sentiments because of reduced social amenity and concerns of HeV exposure risk, and has resulted in calls for the dispersal of urban flying-fox roosts. However, it has been hypothesised that disturbance of urban roosts may result in a stress-mediated increase in HeV infection in flying-foxes, and an increased spillover risk. We sought to examine the impact of roost modification and dispersal on HeV infection dynamics and cortisol concentration dynamics in flying-foxes. The data were analysed in generalised linear mixed models using restricted maximum likelihood (REML). The difference in mean HeV prevalence in samples collected before (4.9%), during (4.7%) and after (3.4%) roost disturbance was small and non-significant (P = 0.440). Similarly, the difference in mean urine specific gravity-corrected urinary cortisol concentrations was small and non-significant (before = 22.71 ng/mL, during = 27.17, after = 18.39) (P= 0.550). We did find an underlying association between cortisol concentration and season, and cortisol concentration and region, suggesting that other (plausibly biological or environmental) variables play a role in cortisol concentration dynamics. The effect of roost disturbance on cortisol concentration approached statistical significance for region, suggesting that the relationship is not fixed, and plausibly reflecting the nature and timing of disturbance. We also found a small positive statistical association between HeV excretion status and urinary cortisol concentration. Finally, we found that the level of flying-fox distress associated with roost disturbance reflected the nature and timing of the activity, highlighting the need for a 'best practice' approach to dispersal or roost modification activities. The findings usefully inform public discussion and policy development in relation to Hendra virus and flying-fox management.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 77 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
Unknown 74 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 14%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Bachelor 9 12%
Other 2 3%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 25 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 21 27%
Environmental Science 7 9%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 7 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 4 5%
Unknown 31 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. 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 01 July 2020.
All research outputs
#1,597,064
of 24,615,949 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#20,031
of 212,825 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,159
of 271,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#583
of 6,847 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,615,949 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 212,825 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% 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 271,397 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6,847 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.