↓ Skip to main content

In vitro protoscolicidal effects of fungal chitosan isolated from Penicillium waksmanii and Penicillium citrinum

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Parasitic Diseases, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#31 of 429)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (92nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
23 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
In vitro protoscolicidal effects of fungal chitosan isolated from Penicillium waksmanii and Penicillium citrinum
Published in
Journal of Parasitic Diseases, May 2013
DOI 10.1007/s12639-013-0300-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mahdi Fakhar, Aroona Chabra, Bahman Rahimi-Esboei, Fatemeh Rezaei

Abstract

Hydatidosis is caused by a tapeworm which infects humans by the larval stage. In humans, the disease is so serious that it requires surgery for treatment. Documents show that there have been many efforts in finding new scolicidal agents for reducing the rate of the infection. The objective of this study was determination of the scolicidal effect of two fungal chitosan types, produced from Penicillium spp. and commercially chitosan (CC) on Echinococcus granulosus protoscolex. Protoscolices were aseptically aspirated from sheep livers hydatid cysts. Four concentrations (50, 100, 200, 400 μg/ml) of each type of prepared chitosan were used for 10, 30, 60 and 180 min. Viability of protoscolices was detected by 0.1 % eosin staining. Fungal chitosan which was the most bioactive type with higher degree of deacetylation showed stronger scolicidal activity in vitro (P < 0.05). Fungal chitosan could be recommended, as good as CC for hydatid cysts control and is a noble alternative for synthetic and chemical scolicidal.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 5 26%
Researcher 3 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Lecturer 1 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 4 21%
Unknown 3 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 3 16%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Engineering 2 11%
Environmental Science 1 5%
Other 4 21%
Unknown 4 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 October 2015.
All research outputs
#7,216,867
of 22,811,321 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Parasitic Diseases
#31
of 429 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,862
of 195,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Parasitic Diseases
#1
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,811,321 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 429 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 195,053 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 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 92% of its contemporaries.