↓ Skip to main content

One size does not fit all: Monitoring faecal glucocorticoid metabolites in marsupials

Overview of attention for article published in General & Comparative Endocrinology, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Readers on

mendeley
81 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
One size does not fit all: Monitoring faecal glucocorticoid metabolites in marsupials
Published in
General & Comparative Endocrinology, October 2015
DOI 10.1016/j.ygcen.2015.10.011
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Marsupial research, conservation, and management can benefit greatly from knowledge about glucocorticoid (GC) secretion patterns because GCs influence numerous aspects of physiology and play a crucial role in regulating an animal's response to stressors. Faecal glucocorticoid metabolites (FGM) offer a non-invasive tool for tracking changes in GCs over time. To date, there are relatively few validated assays for marsupials compared with other taxa, and those that have been published generally test only one assay. However, different assays can yield very different signals of adrenal activity. The goal of this study was to compare the performance of five different enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) for monitoring adrenocortical activity via FGM in 13 marsupial species. We monitored FGM response to two types of events: biological stressors (e.g., transport, novel environment) and pharmacological stimulation (ACTH injection). For each individual animal and assay, FGM peaks were identified using the iterative baseline approach. Performance of the EIAs for each species was evaluated by determining (1) the percent of individuals with a detectable peak 0.125 - 4.5 d post-event, and (2) the biological sensitivity of the assay as measured by strength of the post-event response relative to baseline variability (Z-score). Assays were defined as successful if they detected a peak in at least 50% of the individuals and the mean species response had a Z ⩾ 2. By this criterion, at least one assay was successful in 10 of the 13 species, but the best-performing assay varied among species, even those species that were closely related. Furthermore, the ability to confidently assess assay performance was influenced by the experimental protocols used. We discuss the implications of our findings for biological validation studies.

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.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 81 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Austria 1 1%
Unknown 80 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 20%
Student > Bachelor 8 10%
Researcher 7 9%
Student > Postgraduate 5 6%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 17 21%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 30 37%
Environmental Science 10 12%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 7 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Psychology 2 2%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 21 26%
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 28 April 2017.
All research outputs
#10,903,193
of 33,953,699 outputs
Outputs from General & Comparative Endocrinology
#470
of 2,371 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,325
of 320,980 outputs
Outputs of similar age from General & Comparative Endocrinology
#6
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,953,699 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,371 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% 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 320,980 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 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.