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 |
Cytotoxic and Antimicrobial Activities of Cantharellus cibarius Fr. (Cantarellaceae)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Medicinal Food, June 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1089/jmf.2016.0176 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marina Kolundžić, Tatjana Stanojković, Jelena Radović, Ana Tačić, Margarita Dodevska, Marina Milenković, Francesca Sisto, Carla Masia, Giampietro Farronato, Vesna Nikolić, Tatjana Kundaković |
| Abstract |
Antibacterial and cytotoxic activities of cyclohexane, dichloromethane, methanol, and aqueous extracts of Cantharellus cibarius were tested. Broth microdilution assay was performed against 10 bacterial strains (Staphylococcus aureus, S. epidermidis, Micrococcus luteus, Bacillus subtilis, Enterococcus feacalis, Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Salmonella abony), with emphasis on Helicobacter pylori. Methanol extract was the most active against H. pylori strains with minimal inhibitory concentration values between 4 and 32 μg/mL. All extracts were active against antibiotic resistant H. pylori. Methanol and aqueous extracts had no cytotoxicity against tested cell lines, whereas cyclohexane and dichloromethane extracts were active against HeLa and N87 cells, but also against healthy MRC-5 cells (IC50 39.26 ± 1.24-134.79 ± 0.01 μg/mL). The tested aqueous extracts have shown 68% of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitory activity in doses of 1.25 mg/mL. Chemical analysis has shown the presence of linoleic, cis-vaccenic, and oleic acids, sterols, β-glucans, and polyphenolic compounds. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 33 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Professor | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 9 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 15% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 12% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 9% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 18% |
| Unknown | 9 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 22 July 2022.
All research outputs
#15,173,117
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medicinal Food
#899
of 1,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,131
of 331,803 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medicinal Food
#7
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,618 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.0. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 331,803 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 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 72% of its contemporaries.