| Title |
Tuberculosis in dromedary camels slaughtered in Nigeria: a documentation of lesions at postmortem
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Tropical Animal Health and Production, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11250-018-1661-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ibrahim Ahmad, Caleb Ayuba Kudi, Mohammed Babashani, Umar Mohammed Chafe, Yusuf Yakubu, Aminu Shittu |
| Abstract |
In comparison with other livestock, tuberculosis (TB) in camels has not been extensively studied in Nigeria. Camels in the hands of Nigerian pastoralists share the livestock ecosystem and are increasingly becoming an important component of the sector. This study was designed to investigate the occurrence of TB lesions and animal-level risk of infection in slaughtered camel carcasses in one of the public abattoirs in Nigeria, from June to August 2016. A total of 212 camel carcasses comprising 82.5% (175/212) males and 17.5% (37/212) females were examined for tuberculous lesions. Of the carcasses examined, 33.5% (71/212) had TB lesions. The occurrence of lesions was most significantly associated with poor body condition (OR = 0.249; CI 0.134-0.454 [p < 0.001]). Distribution among anatomical sites of macroscopic lesions in the infected camels revealed three different pathological patterns as pulmonary (n = 51), abdominal (n = 11), and disseminated (n = 9) forms. Higher prevalence of gross TB lesions in camel carcasses highlights eminent threats to both animal and public health, pointing to an already existing risk of intra- and inter-species transmission of infection. |
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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 17% |
| Researcher | 2 | 9% |
| Librarian | 1 | 4% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 9 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 3 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 9% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 11 | 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 14 July 2018.
All research outputs
#16,223,992
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Tropical Animal Health and Production
#556
of 1,384 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#212,626
of 330,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Tropical Animal Health and Production
#11
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,384 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.3. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 330,076 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.