↓ Skip to main content

Decontamination by Persteril 36 may affect the reliability of DNA-based detection of biological warfare agents—short communication

Overview of attention for article published in Folia Microbiologica, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
Title
Decontamination by Persteril 36 may affect the reliability of DNA-based detection of biological warfare agents—short communication
Published in
Folia Microbiologica, February 2016
DOI 10.1007/s12223-016-0451-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jirina Josefiova, Martin Pospisek, Daniel Vanek

Abstract

Persteril 36 is a disinfectant with a broad spectrum of antimicrobial activity. Because of its bactericidal, virucidal, fungicidal, and sporicidal effectiveness, it is used as a disinfectant against biological warfare agents in the emergency and army services. In case of an attack with potentially harmful biological agents, a person's gear or afflicted skin is sprayed with a diluted solution of Persteril 36 as a precaution. Subsequently, the remains of the biological agents are analyzed. However, the question remains concerning whether DNA can be successfully analyzed from Persteril 36-treated dead bacterial cells. Spore-forming Bacillus subtilis and Gram-negative Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Xanthomonas campestris were splattered on a camouflage suit and treated with 2 or 0.2 % Persteril 36. After the disinfectant vaporized, the bacterial DNA was extracted and quantified by real-time PCR. A sufficient amount of DNA was recovered for downstream analysis only in the case of spore-forming B. subtilis treated with a 0.2 % solution of Persteril 36. The bacterial DNA was almost completely destroyed in Gram-negative bacteria or after treatment with the more concentrated solution in B. subtilis. This phenomenon can lead to false-negative results during the identification of harmful microorganisms.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 11%
Unknown 8 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 2 22%
Student > Bachelor 1 11%
Professor 1 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 11%
Student > Master 1 11%
Other 1 11%
Unknown 2 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 11%
Computer Science 1 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 11%
Neuroscience 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 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 26 February 2016.
All research outputs
#15,362,070
of 22,852,911 outputs
Outputs from Folia Microbiologica
#455
of 741 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,011
of 298,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Folia Microbiologica
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,852,911 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 741 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 298,866 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 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.