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 |
The Special Neuraminidase Stalk-Motif Responsible for Increased Virulence and Pathogenesis of H5N1 Influenza A Virus
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, July 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0006277 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hongbo Zhou, Zhengjun Yu, Yong Hu, Jiagang Tu, Wei Zou, Yaping Peng, Jiping Zhu, Yongtao Li, Anding Zhang, Ziniu Yu, Zhiping Ye, Huanchun Chen, Meilin Jin |
| Abstract |
The variation of highly pathogenic avian influenza H5N1 virus results in gradually increased virulence in poultry, and human cases continue to accumulate. The neuraminidase (NA) stalk region of influenza virus varies considerably and may associate with its virulence. The NA stalk region of all N1 subtype influenza A viruses can be divided into six different stalk-motifs, H5N1/2004-like (NA-wt), WSN-like, H5N1/97-like, PR/8-like, H7N1/99-like and H5N1/96-like. The NA-wt is a special NA stalk-motif which was first observed in H5N1 influenza virus in 2000, with a 20-amino acid deletion in the 49(th) to 68(th) positions of the stalk region. Here we show that there is a gradual increase of the special NA stalk-motif in H5N1 isolates from 2000 to 2007, and notably, the special stalk-motif is observed in all 173 H5N1 human isolates from 2004 to 2007. The recombinant H5N1 virus with the special stalk-motif possesses the highest virulence and pathogenicity in chicken and mice, while the recombinant viruses with the other stalk-motifs display attenuated phenotype. This indicates that the special stalk-motif has contributed to the high virulence and pathogenicity of H5N1 isolates since 2000. The gradually increasing emergence of the special NA stalk-motif in H5N1 isolates, especially in human isolates, deserves attention by all. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Chile | 1 | 1% |
| Denmark | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 67 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 14 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 20% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 10% |
| Professor | 6 | 9% |
| Other | 12 | 17% |
| Unknown | 6 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 26 | 37% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 9 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 10% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 6 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 10% |
| Unknown | 10 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 July 2009.
All research outputs
#3,259,127
of 22,707,247 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#42,832
of 193,889 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,771
of 95,513 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#123
of 509 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,707,247 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,889 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% 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 95,513 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 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 509 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 74% of its contemporaries.