↓ Skip to main content

Association mapping of genetic risk factors for chronic wasting disease in wild deer

Overview of attention for article published in Evolutionary Applications, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (58th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Association mapping of genetic risk factors for chronic wasting disease in wild deer
Published in
Evolutionary Applications, August 2012
DOI 10.1111/eva.12003
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tomomi Matsumoto, Michael D. Samuel, Trent Bollinger, Margo Pybus, David W. Coltman

Abstract

Chronic wasting disease (CWD) is a fatal transmissible spongiform encephalopathy affecting North American cervids. We assessed the feasibility of association mapping CWD genetic risk factors in wild white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) and mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) using a panel of bovine microsatellite markers from three homologous deer linkage groups predicted to contain candidate genes. These markers had a low cross-species amplification rate (27.9%) and showed weak linkage disequilibrium (<1 cM). Markers near the prion protein and the neurofibromin 1 (NF1) genes were suggestively associated with CWD status in white-tailed deer (P = 0.006) and mule deer (P = 0.02), respectively. This is the first time an association between the NF1 region and CWD has been reported.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
India 1 2%
Unknown 41 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 28%
Researcher 8 19%
Student > Master 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Professor 3 7%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 3 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 51%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 10 23%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 7%
Environmental Science 3 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 9%

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 30 October 2019.
All research outputs
#7,315,505
of 14,202,103 outputs
Outputs from Evolutionary Applications
#601
of 918 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#60,395
of 147,272 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Evolutionary Applications
#11
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 14,202,103 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 918 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 147,272 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 58% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.