You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Colonisation and succession of marine biofilm-dwelling ciliate assemblages on biocidal antifouling and fouling-release coatings in temperate Australia
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Biofouling, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1080/08927014.2015.1105221 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Matthew G. Watson, Andrew J. Scardino, Liliana Zalizniak, Jeff Shimeta |
| Abstract |
Ciliate assemblages are often overlooked, but ubiquitous components of microbial biofilms which require a better understanding. Ciliate, diatom and bacterial colonisation were evaluated on two fouling-release (FR) coatings, viz. Intersleek 970 and Hempasil X3, and two biocidal antifouling (AF) coatings, viz. Intersmooth 360 and Interspeed 5640, in Port Phillip Bay, Australia. A total of 15 genera were identified during the 10 week deployment. Intersleek 970 displayed the most rapid fouling by ciliates, reaching 63.3(± 5.9) cells cm(-2). After 10 weeks, all four coatings were extensively fouled. However, the toxicity of the AF coatings still significantly inhibited microbial fouling compared to the FR coatings. On all treatments, colonies of sessile peritrichs dominated the ciliate assemblage in the early stage of succession, but as the biofilm matured, vagile ciliates exerted more influence on the assemblage structure. The AF coatings showed selective toxic effects, causing significant differences in the ciliate species assemblages among the treatments. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 32 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Researcher | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 21% |
| Unknown | 4 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 27% |
| Environmental Science | 7 | 21% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Engineering | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 18% |
| Unknown | 5 | 15% |
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 15 December 2015.
All research outputs
#18,432,465
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from Biofouling
#501
of 752 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#205,099
of 285,075 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Biofouling
#6
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 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 752 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 285,075 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 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.