↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of selective media for the isolation of Brachyspira aalborgi from human faeces

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Microbiology, June 2003
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

patent
2 patents

Readers on

mendeley
13 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
Evaluation of selective media for the isolation of Brachyspira aalborgi from human faeces
Published in
Journal of Medical Microbiology, June 2003
DOI 10.1099/jmm.0.05105-0
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

The purposes of this study were to identify a solid medium that supports improved growth of the anaerobic intestinal spirochaete Brachyspira aalborgi, to modify this for use as a selective isolation medium and then to test the medium for its effectiveness in isolating B. aalborgi from patients' faeces. Of the media evaluated, brain heart infusion agar (BHIA) with 10 % bovine blood (BB) was the most effective base-supplement combination for growth, with colonies attaining 1.2 mm in diameter by 21 days. Incubation in an anaerobic jar (94 % H(2), 6 % CO(2)) permitted growth of larger colonies than incubation in an anaerobic chamber (80 % N(2), 10 % H(2), 10 % CO(2)). Growth was improved only slightly at 38.5 degrees C compared with 37 degrees C. Selection of B. aalborgi from artificially seeded faeces was achieved equally well on eight different solid media containing spectinomycin (400 micro g ml(-1)) alone or in combinations with polymyxin B (5 micro g ml(-1)), colistin (25 micro g ml(-1)) and rifampicin (12.5 micro g ml(-1)). By using BHIA 10 % BB with spectinomycin plus polymyxin B, B. aalborgi was isolated from one of five human faecal samples that were positive for B. aalborgi by PCR amplification. This is the first report of the isolation of B. aalborgi from human faeces.

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.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 2 15%
Professor 2 15%
Researcher 2 15%
Lecturer 1 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Other 2 15%
Unknown 3 23%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 23%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 15%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 31%
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 06 January 2026.
All research outputs
#10,905,834
of 31,439,095 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Microbiology
#1,209
of 3,516 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#26,920
of 69,916 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Microbiology
#4
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 31,439,095 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,516 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.9. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 69,916 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.