↓ Skip to main content
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
52 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.
Article details
Title
Mapping B-cell responses to Salmonella enterica serovars Typhimurium and Enteritidis in chickens for the discrimination of infected from vaccinated animals
Published in
Scientific Reports, August 2016
DOI 10.1038/srep31186
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Serological surveillance and vaccination are important strategies for controlling infectious diseases of food production animals. However, the compatibility of these strategies is limited by a lack of assays capable of differentiating infected from vaccinated animals (DIVA tests) for established killed or attenuated vaccines. Here, we used next generation phage-display (NGPD) and a 2-proportion Z score analysis to identify peptides that were preferentially bound by IgY from chickens infected with Salmonella Typhimurium or S. Enteritidis compared to IgY from vaccinates, for both an attenuated and an inactivated commercial vaccine. Peptides that were highly enriched against IgY from at least 4 out of 10 infected chickens were selected: 18 and 12 peptides for the killed and attenuated vaccines, respectively. The ten most discriminatory peptides for each vaccine were identified in an ELISA using a training set of IgY samples. These peptides were then used in multi-peptide assays that, when analysing a wider set of samples from infected and vaccinated animals, diagnosed infection with 100% sensitivity and specificity. The data describes a method for the development of DIVA assays for conventional attenuated and killed vaccines.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
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 demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 19%
Researcher 9 17%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Other 3 6%
Lecturer 3 6%
Other 10 19%
Unknown 13 25%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 23%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 9 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Chemistry 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 16 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 October 2016.
All research outputs
#6,979,646
of 22,882,389 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#47,181
of 123,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#115,639
of 355,869 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#1,338
of 3,681 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,882,389 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 123,615 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% 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 355,869 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,681 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.