↓ Skip to main content

Identification of Amoebae Implicated in the Life Cycle of Pfiesteria and Pfiestena‐Like Dinoflagellates

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology, July 2005
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
5 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 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
Identification of Amoebae Implicated in the Life Cycle of Pfiesteria and Pfiestena‐Like Dinoflagellates
Published in
Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology, July 2005
DOI 10.1111/j.1550-7408.2004.tb00290.x
Pubmed ID
Authors

MICHAEL T. PEGLAR, THOMAS A NERAD, O. ROGER ANDERSON, PATRICK M. GILLEVET

Abstract

This study was undertaken to assess whether amoebae commonly found in mesohaline environments are in fact stages in the life cycles of Pfiesteria and Pfiesteria-like dinoflagellates. Primary isolations of amoebae and dinoflagellates were made from water and sediment samples from five tributaries of the Chesapeake Bay. Additional amoebae were also cloned from bioassay aquaria where fish mortality was attributed to Pfiesteria. Electron microscopy and small subunit (SSU) rRNA gene sequence analysis of these isolates clearly demonstrated that the commonly depicted amoeboid form of Pfiisteria is very likely a species of Korotnevella and is unrelated to Pfiesteria or Pfiesteria-like dinoflagellates. We have determined that the Pfiesteria and Pfiesteria-like dinoflagellates examined in this study undergo a typical homothallic life cycle without amoeboid stages. Furthermore, we have demonstrated that cloned amoebae sharing morphological characteristics described for stages in the life cycle of Pfiesteria do not transform into dinozoites. The strict clonal isolation and cultivation techniques used in this study substantially support the conclusion that the amoebae and some of the flagellates depicted in the life cycle of Pfiesteria are environmental contaminants of the Pfiesteria culture system and that the Ambush Predator Hypothesis needs to be rigorously reevaluated.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Chile 1 7%
United States 1 7%
Unknown 12 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 29%
Professor 3 21%
Student > Bachelor 2 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 14%
Other 1 7%
Other 2 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 71%
Environmental Science 2 14%
Arts and Humanities 1 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 7%
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 19 May 2009.
All research outputs
#8,211,571
of 24,602,766 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology
#350
of 1,023 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,118
of 61,765 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology
#15
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,602,766 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 1,023 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 61,765 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.