↓ Skip to main content

Nasal, oral and rectal microbiota of Black lion tamarins (Leontopithecus chrysopygus)

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 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
Nasal, oral and rectal microbiota of Black lion tamarins (Leontopithecus chrysopygus)
Published in
Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, December 2014
DOI 10.1590/s1517-83822014000400051
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vania M. Carvalho, Ralph E.T. Vanstreels, Cátia D. Paula, Cristiane K.M. Kolesnikovas, Maria Christina C. Ramos, Selene D. Coutinho, Cristiana S. Martins, Alcides Pissinatti, José L. Catão-Dias

Abstract

Black lion tamarins (Leontopithecus chrysopygus) are endangered callithrichids. Their conservation may require future translocations or reintroductions; however these approaches involve risks of pathogen introduction in the environment and stress-related opportunistic infections in these animals. In order to screen for opportunistic and potential pathogenic bacterial and fungal microbiota, ten free-ranging and ten captive Black lion tamarins were studied and the results compared. Nasal, oral and rectal swabs were collected and cultured for aerobic and facultative anaerobic bacteria and fungi, and a total 203 bacterial and 84 fungal isolates were obtained. Overall, the most frequent organisms were Staphylococcus spp., Bacillus spp., Candida spp. and Aspergillus spp. Microbiota of free-ranging and captive animals were similar in composition. A number of potentially pathogenic organisms were identified, emphasizing the importance of microbiological screening in future translocation or reintroduction conservation management programs.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 19%
Researcher 6 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 3 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 27%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 8 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 14%
Environmental Science 2 5%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 5%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 4 11%
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 16 October 2015.
All research outputs
#22,756,649
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
#1,047
of 1,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#315,259
of 369,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
#11
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,377 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 369,122 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.