| Title |
Proposed Surveillance for Influenza A in Feral Pigs
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
EcoHealth, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10393-016-1126-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Antonia E. Dalziel, Heidi A. Peck, Aeron C. Hurt, Julie Cooke, Phillip Cassey |
| Abstract |
Pigs carry receptors for both avian- and human-adapted influenza viruses and have previously been proposed as a mixing and amplification vessel for influenza. Until now, there has been no investigation of influenza A viruses within feral pigs in Australia. We collected samples from feral pigs in Ramsar listed wetlands of South Australia and demonstrated positive antibodies to influenza A viruses. We propose feral pigs, and their control programs, as an available resource for future surveillance for influenza A viruses. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 10 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 9 | 90% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 20% |
| Researcher | 2 | 20% |
| Professor | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 2 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 40% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 20% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 10% |
| Unknown | 3 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 03 June 2016.
All research outputs
#3,536,293
of 22,869,263 outputs
Outputs from EcoHealth
#189
of 710 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,908
of 311,729 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EcoHealth
#3
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,869,263 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 710 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% 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 311,729 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.