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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Characterization of infectious dose and lethal dose of two strains of infectious hematopoietic necrosis virus (IHNV)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Virus Research, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.virusres.2015.12.020 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Douglas G McKenney, Gael Kurath, Andrew R Wargo |
| Abstract |
The ability to infect a host is a key trait of a virus, and differences in infectivity could put one virus at an evolutionary advantage over another. In this study we have quantified the infectivity of two strains of infectious hematopoietic necrosis virus (IHNV) that are known to differ in fitness and virulence. By exposing juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) hosts to a wide range of virus doses, we were able to calculate the infectious dose in terms of ID50 values for the two genotypes. Lethal dose experiments were also conducted to confirm the virulence difference between the two virus genotypes, using a range of virus doses and holding fish either in isolation or in batch so as to calculate LD50 values. We found that infectivity is positively correlated with virulence, with the more virulent genotype having higher infectivity. Additionally, infectivity increases more steeply over a short range of doses compared to virulence, which has a shallower increase. We also examined the data using models of virion interaction and found no evidence to suggest that virions have either an antagonistic or a synergistic effect on each other, supporting the independent action hypothesis in the process of IHNV infection of rainbow trout. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chile | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 45 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 13 | 28% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 15% |
| Other | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Unknown | 4 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 16 | 34% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 9 | 19% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Unknown | 8 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 10 February 2021.
All research outputs
#2,467,336
of 25,506,250 outputs
Outputs from Virus Research
#155
of 3,320 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,339
of 399,739 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Virus Research
#4
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,506,250 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,320 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 399,739 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.