↓ Skip to main content

Prevalence of pathogenic bacteria in Ixodes ricinus ticks in Central Bohemia

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

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (51st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
Title
Prevalence of pathogenic bacteria in Ixodes ricinus ticks in Central Bohemia
Published in
Experimental and Applied Acarology, November 2015
DOI 10.1007/s10493-015-9988-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Radek Klubal, Jan Kopecky, Marta Nesvorna, Olivier A. E. Sparagano, Jana Thomayerova, Jan Hubert

Abstract

Bacteria associated with the tick Ixodes ricinus were assessed in specimens unattached or attached to the skin of cats, dogs and humans, collected in the Czech Republic. The bacteria were detected by PCR in 97 of 142 pooled samples including 204 ticks, i.e. 1-7 ticks per sample, collected at the same time from one host. A fragment of the bacterial 16S rRNA gene was amplified, cloned and sequenced from 32 randomly selected samples. The most frequent sequences were those related to Candidatus Midichloria midichlori (71 % of cloned sequences), followed by Diplorickettsia (13 %), Spiroplasma (3 %), Rickettsia (3 %), Pasteurella (3 %), Morganella (3 %), Pseudomonas (2 %), Bacillus (1 %), Methylobacterium (1 %) and Phyllobacterium (1 %). The phylogenetic analysis of Spiroplasma 16S rRNA gene sequences showed two groups related to Spiroplasma eriocheiris and Spiroplasma melliferum, respectively. Using group-specific primers, the following potentially pathogenic bacteria were detected: Borellia (in 20 % of the 142 samples), Rickettsia (12 %), Spiroplasma (5 %), Diplorickettsia (5 %) and Anaplasma (2 %). In total, 68 % of I. ricinus samples (97/142) contained detectable bacteria and 13 % contained two or more putative pathogenic groups. The prevalence of tick-borne bacteria was similar to the observations in other European countries.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Hungary 1 2%
Unknown 41 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 35%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 14%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Lecturer 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 7 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 33%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 12%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 5%
Other 3 7%
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 28 November 2015.
All research outputs
#13,839,532
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Experimental and Applied Acarology
#421
of 914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,526
of 392,213 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental and Applied Acarology
#5
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 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 392,213 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 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.