↓ Skip to main content

Feline panleukopaenia virus in captive non-domestic felids in South Africa

Overview of attention for article published in Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 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
Feline panleukopaenia virus in captive non-domestic felids in South Africa
Published in
Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research, March 2016
DOI 10.4102/ojvr.v83i1.1099
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emily P. Lane, Helene Brettschneider, Peter Caldwell, Almero Oosthuizen, Desiré L. Dalton, Liza du Plessis, Johan Steyl, Antoinette Kotze

Abstract

An outbreak of feline panleukopaenia virus (FPLV) infection was diagnosed by pathology, electron microscopy and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in vaccinated captive-bred subadult cheetahs in South Africa. Subsequent to this disease outbreak, 12 cases of FPLV diagnosed on histology were confirmed by PCR in captive African black-footed cat, caracal, cheetah, lion, ocelot and serval. Phylogenetic analyses of the viral capsid protein gene on PCR-positive samples, vaccine and National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) reference strains identified a previously unknown strain of FPLV, present since at least 2006, that differs from both the inactivated and the modified live vaccine strains. A previously described South African strain from domestic cats and cheetahs was identified in a serval. Surveys of FPLV strains in South African felids are needed to determine the geographical and host species distribution of this virus. Since non-domestic species may be reservoirs of parvoviruses, and since these viruses readily change host specificity, the risks of FPLV transmission between captive-bred and free-ranging carnivores and domestic cats and dogs warrant further research.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 41 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 14%
Researcher 6 14%
Student > Master 5 12%
Other 4 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 10%
Other 7 17%
Unknown 10 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 11 26%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 21%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Other 4 10%
Unknown 11 26%
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 07 July 2016.
All research outputs
#17,289,387
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research
#138
of 258 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,337
of 314,758 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Onderstepoort Journal of Veterinary Research
#9
of 15 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 258 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% 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 314,758 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 15 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.