↓ Skip to main content

Estimating Animal Abundance in Ground Beef Batches Assayed with Molecular Markers

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (68th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
11 Mendeley
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.
Title
Estimating Animal Abundance in Ground Beef Batches Assayed with Molecular Markers
Published in
PLOS ONE, March 2012
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0034191
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xin-Sheng Hu, Janika Simila, Sindey Schueler Platz, Stephen S. Moore, Graham Plastow, Ciaran N. Meghen

Abstract

Estimating animal abundance in industrial scale batches of ground meat is important for mapping meat products through the manufacturing process and for effectively tracing the finished product during a food safety recall. The processing of ground beef involves a potentially large number of animals from diverse sources in a single product batch, which produces a high heterogeneity in capture probability. In order to estimate animal abundance through DNA profiling of ground beef constituents, two parameter-based statistical models were developed for incidence data. Simulations were applied to evaluate the maximum likelihood estimate (MLE) of a joint likelihood function from multiple surveys, showing superiority in the presence of high capture heterogeneity with small sample sizes, or comparable estimation in the presence of low capture heterogeneity with a large sample size when compared to other existing models. Our model employs the full information on the pattern of the capture-recapture frequencies from multiple samples. We applied the proposed models to estimate animal abundance in six manufacturing beef batches, genotyped using 30 single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers, from a large scale beef grinding facility. Results show that between 411∼1367 animals were present in six manufacturing beef batches. These estimates are informative as a reference for improving recall processes and tracing finished meat products back to source.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 11 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 27%
Student > Bachelor 1 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 9%
Professor 1 9%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 45%
Environmental Science 1 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 9%
Engineering 1 9%
Unknown 3 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 08 April 2014.
All research outputs
#7,449,535
of 24,040,389 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#93,185
of 206,325 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,822
of 163,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#1,331
of 3,731 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,040,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 206,325 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. 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 163,650 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 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,731 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.