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 |
Toxicity of Imidacloprid to the Stingless Bee Scaptotrigona postica Latreille, 1807 (Hymenoptera: Apidae)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00128-015-1488-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hellen Maria Soares, Cynthia Renata Oliveira Jacob, Stephan Malfitano Carvalho, Roberta Cornélio Ferreira Nocelli, Osmar Malaspina |
| Abstract |
The stingless bee Scaptotrigona postica is an important pollinator of native and cultivated plants in Brazil. Among the factors affecting the survival of these insects is the indiscriminate use of insecticides, including the neonicotinoid imidacloprid. This work determined the toxicity of imidacloprid as the topical median lethal dose (LD50) and the oral median lethal concentration (LC50) as tools for assessing the effects of this insecticide. The 24 and 48 h LD50 values were 25.2 and 24.5 ng of active ingredient (a.i.)/bee, respectively. The 24 and 48 h LC50 values were 42.5 and 14.3 ng a.i./µL of diet, respectively. Ours results show the hazard of imidacloprid and the vulnerability of stingless bees to it, providing relevant toxicological data that can used in mitigation programs to ensure the conservation of this species. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 110 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 106 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 14% |
| Researcher | 14 | 13% |
| Professor | 12 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 10% |
| Other | 18 | 16% |
| Unknown | 29 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 41 | 37% |
| Environmental Science | 11 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 7% |
| Unknown | 36 | 33% |
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 31 October 2022.
All research outputs
#3,985,940
of 24,119,703 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#242
of 4,112 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,644
of 365,343 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology
#3
of 77 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,119,703 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,112 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 365,343 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 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 77 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.