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 |
Macelignan inhibits bee pathogenic fungi Ascophaera apis growth through HOG1 pathway
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1590/1414-431x20165313 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Y.K. Shin, K.Y. Kim |
| Abstract |
Ascosphaera apis is a bee pathogen that causes bee larvae infection disease, to which treatment is not yet well investigated. The aim of this study was to investigate antifungal susceptibility in vitro against A. apis and to identify a new antifungal agent for this pathogen through minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) assay and western blot analysis. Macelignan had 1.56 and 3.125 μg/mL MIC against A. apis after 24 and 48 h, respectively, exhibiting the strongest growth inhibition against A. apis among the tested compounds (corosolic acid, dehydrocostus lactone, loganic acid, tracheloside, fangchinoline and emodin-8-O-β-D-glucopyranoside). Furthermore, macelignan showed a narrow-ranged spectrum against various fungal strains without any mammalian cell cytotoxicity. In spite of miconazole having powerful broad-ranged anti-fungal activity including A. apis, it demonstrated strong cytotoxicity. Therefore, even if macelignan alone was effective as an antifungal agent to treat A. apis, combined treatment with miconazole was more useful to overcome toxicity, drug resistance occurrence and cost effectiveness. Finally, HOG1 was revealed as a target molecule of macelignan in the anti-A. apis activity by inhibiting phosphorylation using S. cerevisiae as a model system. Based on our results, macelignan, a food-grade antimicrobial compound, would be an effective antifungal agent against A. apis infection in bees. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 28 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 14% |
| Researcher | 4 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 11% |
| Professor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 4 | 14% |
| Unknown | 6 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 11% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 18% |
| Unknown | 7 | 25% |
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 27 May 2017.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research
#901
of 1,254 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#295,042
of 399,674 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research
#41
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,254 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.9. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 399,674 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.