↓ Skip to main content

Environmental Drivers of Ranavirus in Free-Living Amphibians in Constructed Ponds

Overview of attention for article published in EcoHealth, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (64th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
Title
Environmental Drivers of Ranavirus in Free-Living Amphibians in Constructed Ponds
Published in
EcoHealth, August 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10393-018-1350-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tess E. Youker-Smith, Philipp H. Boersch-Supan, Christopher M. Whipps, Sadie J. Ryan

Abstract

Amphibian ranaviruses occur globally, but we are only beginning to understand mechanisms for emergence. Ranaviruses are aquatic pathogens which can cause > 90% mortality in larvae of many aquatic-breeding amphibians, making them important focal host taxa. Host susceptibilities and virulence of ranaviruses have been studied extensively in controlled laboratory settings, but research is needed to identify drivers of infection in natural environments. Constructed ponds, essential components of wetland restoration, have been associated with higher ranavirus prevalence than natural ponds, posing a conundrum for conservation efforts, and emphasizing the need to understand potential drivers. In this study, we analyzed 4 years of Frog virus 3 prevalence and associated environmental parameters in populations of wood frogs (Lithobates sylvaticus) and green frogs (Lithobates clamitans) in a constructed pond system. High prevalence was best predicted by low temperature, high host density, low zooplankton concentrations, and Gosner stages approaching metamorphosis. This study identified important variables to measure in assessments of ranaviral infection risk in newly constructed ponds, including effects of zooplankton, which have not been previously quantified in natural settings. Examining factors mediating diseases in natural environments, particularly in managed conservation settings, is important to both validate laboratory findings in situ, and to inform future conservation planning, particularly in the context of adaptive management.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 17%
Student > Master 6 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Student > Postgraduate 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 9 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 21%
Environmental Science 7 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 14%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 11 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 20 March 2019.
All research outputs
#7,002,244
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from EcoHealth
#332
of 713 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,576
of 332,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EcoHealth
#10
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 713 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 332,427 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 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 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.