↓ Skip to main content

Cheetahs have a stronger constitutive innate immunity than leopards

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
45 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user
reddit
2 Redditors

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
Cheetahs have a stronger constitutive innate immunity than leopards
Published in
Scientific Reports, March 2017
DOI 10.1038/srep44837
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sonja K. Heinrich, Heribert Hofer, Alexandre Courtiol, Jörg Melzheimer, Martin Dehnhard, Gábor Á. Czirják, Bettina Wachter

Abstract

As a textbook case for the importance of genetics in conservation, absence of genetic variability at the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) is thought to endanger species viability, since it is considered crucial for pathogen resistance. An alternative view of the immune system inspired by life history theory posits that a strong response should evolve in other components of the immune system if there is little variation in the MHC. In contrast to the leopard (Panthera pardus), the cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) has a relatively low genetic variability at the MHC, yet free-ranging cheetahs are healthy. By comparing the functional competence of the humoral immune system of both species in sympatric populations in Namibia, we demonstrate that cheetahs have a higher constitutive innate but lower induced innate and adaptive immunity than leopards. We conclude (1) immunocompetence of cheetahs is higher than previously thought; (2) studying both innate and adaptive components of immune systems will enrich conservation science.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 45 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 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
South Africa 1 3%
Argentina 1 3%
Unknown 37 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 21%
Researcher 7 18%
Student > Master 6 15%
Unspecified 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Other 10 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 59%
Unspecified 7 18%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 10%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 5%
Environmental Science 2 5%
Other 1 3%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 60. 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 January 2019.
All research outputs
#257,909
of 12,793,889 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#3,212
of 60,065 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#11,387
of 257,766 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#1
of 26 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,793,889 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 60,065 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 257,766 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 26 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 96% of its contemporaries.