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 |
A SEROSURVEY OF DISEASES OF FREE-RANGING GRAY WOLVES (CANIS LUPUS) IN MINNESOTA, USA
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Wildlife Diseases, February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.7589/2016-06-140 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michelle Carstensen, John H. Giudice, Erik C. Hildebrand, J. P. Dubey, John Erb, Dan Stark, John Hart, Shannon Barber-Meyer, L. David Mech, Steve K. Windels, Andrew J. Edwards |
| Abstract |
We tested serum samples from 387 free-ranging wolves ( Canis lupus ) from 2007 to 2013 for exposure to eight canid pathogens to establish baseline data on disease prevalence and spatial distribution in Minnesota's wolf population. We found high exposure to canine adenoviruses 1 and 2 (88% adults, 45% pups), canine parvovirus (82% adults, 24% pups), and Lyme disease (76% adults, 39% pups). Sixty-six percent of adults and 36% of pups exhibited exposure to the protozoan parasite Neospora caninum . Exposure to arboviruses was confirmed, including West Nile virus (37% adults, 18% pups) and eastern equine encephalitis (3% adults). Exposure rates were lower for canine distemper (19% adults, 5% pups) and heartworm (7% adults, 3% pups). Significant spatial trends were observed in wolves exposed to canine parvovirus and Lyme disease. Serologic data do not confirm clinical disease, but better understanding of disease ecology of wolves can provide valuable insight into wildlife population dynamics and improve management of these species. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Singapore | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Austria | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 67 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 23% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 14 | 20% |
| Unknown | 14 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 21 | 30% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 23% |
| Environmental Science | 5 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 16 | 23% |
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 14 April 2022.
All research outputs
#8,476,767
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Wildlife Diseases
#471
of 1,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,550
of 431,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Wildlife Diseases
#11
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,786 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 431,921 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 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 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 57% of its contemporaries.