↓ Skip to main content

The natural infection of birds and ticks feeding on birds with Rickettsia spp. and Coxiella burnetii in Slovakia

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental and Applied Acarology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 Mendeley
Title
The natural infection of birds and ticks feeding on birds with Rickettsia spp. and Coxiella burnetii in Slovakia
Published in
Experimental and Applied Acarology, October 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10493-015-9975-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lenka Berthová, Vladimír Slobodník, Roman Slobodník, Milan Olekšák, Zuzana Sekeyová, Zuzana Svitálková, Mária Kazimírová, Eva Špitalská

Abstract

Ixodid ticks (Acari: Ixodidae) are known as primary vectors of many pathogens causing diseases in humans and animals. Ixodes ricinus is a common ectoparasite in Europe and birds are often hosts of subadult stages of the tick. From 2012 to 2013, 347 birds belonging to 43 species were caught and examined for ticks in three sites of Slovakia. Ticks and blood samples from birds were analysed individually for the presence of Rickettsia spp. and Coxiella burnetii by PCR-based methods. Only I. ricinus was found to infest birds. In total 594 specimens of bird-attached ticks were collected (451 larvae, 142 nymphs, 1 female). Altogether 37.2 % (16/43) of bird species were infested by ticks and some birds carried more than one tick. The great tit, Parus major (83.8 %, 31/37) was the most infested species. In total, 6.6 and 2.7 % of bird-attached ticks were infected with Rickettsia spp. and C. burnetii, respectively. Rickettsia helvetica predominated (5.9 %), whereas R. monacensis (0.5 %) was only sporadically detected. Coxiella burnetii was detected in 0.9 %, Rickettsia spp. in 8.9 % and R. helvetica in 4.2 % of bird blood samples. The great tit was the bird species most infested with I. ricinus, carried R. helvetica and C. burnetti positive tick larvae and nymphs and was found to be rickettsaemic in its blood. Further studies are necessary to define the role of birds in the circulation of rickettsiae and C. burnetii in natural foci.

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 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 3%
Unknown 65 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 24%
Researcher 14 21%
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Other 3 4%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 16 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 27%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 14 21%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 4%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 4%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 22 33%
Attention Score in Context

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 20 October 2015.
All research outputs
#19,246,640
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Experimental and Applied Acarology
#620
of 914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,099
of 286,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental and Applied Acarology
#10
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 914 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.8. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 286,214 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.