↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of the hemolytic activity between C. albicans and non-albicans Candida species

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Oral Research, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 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
Comparison of the hemolytic activity between C. albicans and non-albicans Candida species
Published in
Brazilian Oral Research, December 2013
DOI 10.1590/s1806-83242013000600007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rodnei Dennis Rossoni, Junia Oliveira Barbosa, Simone Furgeri Godinho Vilela, Antonio Olavo Cardoso Jorge, Juliana Campos Junqueira

Abstract

The ability to produce enzymes, such as hemolysins, is an important virulence factor for the genus Candida.The objective of this study was to compare the hemolytic activity between C. albicansand non-albicans Candida species. Fifty strains of Candida species, isolated from the oral cavity of patients infected with HIV were studied. The isolates included the following species: C. albicans, C. dubliniensis, C. glabrata, C. tropicalis, C. krusei, C. parapsilosis, C. dubliniensis, C. norvegensis, C. lusitaniae, and C. guilliermondii. Hemolysin production was evaluated on Sabouraud dextrose agar containing chloramphenicol, blood, and glucose. A loop-full of pure Candidaculture was spot-inoculated onto plates and incubated at 37 ºC for 24 h in a 5% CO2 atmosphere. Hemolytic activity was defined as the formation of a translucent halo around the colonies. All C. albicansstrains that were studied produced hemolysins. Among the non-albicans Candidaspecies, 86% exhibited hemolytic activity. Only C. guilliermondiiand some C. parapsilosis isolates were negative for this enzyme. In conclusion, most non-albicans Candidaspecies had a similar ability to produce hemolysins when compared to C. albicans.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 11 21%
Student > Bachelor 8 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 15%
Lecturer 4 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Other 9 17%
Unknown 8 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 31%
Immunology and Microbiology 8 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 8%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 13 25%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 12 December 2013.
All research outputs
#3,894,650
of 4,655,094 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Oral Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#100,909
of 124,824 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Oral Research
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 4,655,094 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 0.0. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
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 124,824 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them