↓ Skip to main content

Toxicoinfectious Botulism in Commercial Caponized Chickens

Overview of attention for article published in Avian Diseases, June 2005
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 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
Toxicoinfectious Botulism in Commercial Caponized Chickens
Published in
Avian Diseases, June 2005
DOI 10.1637/7330-011805
Pubmed ID
Authors

Darrell W. Trampel, Susan R. Smith, Tonie E. Rocke

Abstract

During the summer of 2003, two flocks of commercial broiler chickens experienced unusually high death losses following caponizing at 3 wk of age and again between 8 and 14 wk of age. In September, fifteen 11-wk-old live capons were submitted to the Iowa State University Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory for assistance. In both flocks, the second episode of elevated mortality was associated with incoordination, flaccid paralysis of leg, wing, and neck muscles, a recumbent body posture characterized by neck extension, and diarrhea. No macroscopic or microscopic lesions were detected in affected chickens. Hearts containing dotted blood and ceca were submitted to the National Wildlife Health Center in Madison, WI. Type C. botulinum toxin was identified in heart blood and ceca by mouse bioassay tests. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay tests on heart blood samples were also positive for type C. botulinum toxin. Clostridium botulinum was isolated from the ceca and genes encoding type C. botulinum toxin were detected in cecal contents by a polymerase chain reaction test. Chickens are less susceptible to botulism as they age, and this disease has not previously been documented in broilers as old as 14 wk of age. Wound contamination by spores of C. botulinum may have contributed to the unusually high death losses following caponizing.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 5%
Unknown 20 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 29%
Other 3 14%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 10%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 4 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 33%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 14%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 5%
Social Sciences 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 5 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 05 July 2013.
All research outputs
#8,535,472
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Avian Diseases
#337
of 1,473 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#24,294
of 68,188 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Avian Diseases
#2
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,473 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 68,188 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.