↓ Skip to main content

Necropsy-based Wild Fish Health Assessment

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Visualized Experiments, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Necropsy-based Wild Fish Health Assessment
Published in
Journal of Visualized Experiments, September 2018
DOI 10.3791/57946
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vicki S. Blazer, Heather L. Walsh, Ryan P. Braham, Cheyenne Smith

Abstract

Anthropogenic influences from increased nutrients and chemical contaminants, to habitat alterations and climate change, can have significant effects on fish populations. Adverse effects monitoring, utilizing biomarkers from the organismal to the molecular level, can be used to assess the cumulative effects on fishes and other organisms. Fish health has been used worldwide as an indicator of aquatic ecosystem health. The necropsy-based fish health assessment provides data on visible abnormalities and lesions, parasites, condition and organosomatic indices. These can be compared by site, season and sex, as well as temporally, to document change over time. Severity ratings can be assigned to various observations to calculate a fish health index for more quantitative assessment. A drawback of the necropsy-based assessment is that it is based on visual observations and condition factors, which are not as sensitive as tissue and subcellular biomarkers for sublethal effects. Additionally, it is rarely possible to identify causes or risk factors associated with observed abnormalities. So, for instance a raised lesion or "tumor" on the fins, lips or body surface may be a neoplasm. However, it could also be a response to a parasite, chronic inflammation or hyperplasia of normal cells in response to an irritant. Conversely, neoplasms, certain parasites, other infectious agents and many tissue changes are not visible and so may be underestimated. However, during the necropsy-based assessment, blood (plasma), tissues for histopathology (microscopic pathology), genomics and other molecular analyses, and otoliths for aging can be collected. These downstream analyses, together with geospatial analyses, habitat assessments, water quality and contaminant analyses can all be important in comprehensive ecosystem evaluations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 59 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 20%
Student > Bachelor 7 12%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 20 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 19%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 10 17%
Environmental Science 5 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Social Sciences 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 23 39%
Attention Score in Context

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 11 October 2018.
All research outputs
#14,362,166
of 23,103,436 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Visualized Experiments
#3,870
of 10,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,987
of 337,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Visualized Experiments
#110
of 289 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,436 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,359 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 337,559 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 289 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 61% of its contemporaries.