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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Quantification of hookworm ova from wastewater matrices using quantitative PCR
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Environmental Sciences (Elsevier), February 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1016/j.jes.2016.10.019 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Pradip Gyawali, Warish Ahmed, Jatinder P. Sidhu, Paul Jagals, Simon Toze |
| Abstract |
A quantitative PCR (qPCR) assay was used to quantify Ancylostoma caninum ova in wastewater and sludge samples. We estimated the average gene copy numbers for a single ovum using a mixed population of ova. The average gene copy numbers derived from the mixed population were used to estimate numbers of hookworm ova in A. caninum seeded and unseeded wastewater and sludge samples. The newly developed qPCR assay estimated an average of 3.7×10(3) gene copies per ovum, which was then validated by seeding known numbers of hookworm ova into treated wastewater. The qPCR estimated an average of (1.1±0.1), (8.6±2.9) and (67.3±10.4) ova for treated wastewater that was seeded with (1±0), (10±2) and (100±21) ova, respectively. The further application of the qPCR assay for the quantification of A. caninum ova was determined by seeding a known numbers of ova into the wastewater matrices. The qPCR results indicated that 50%, 90% and 67% of treated wastewater (1L), raw wastewater (1L) and sludge (~4g) samples had variable numbers of A. caninum gene copies. After conversion of the qPCR estimated gene copy numbers to ova for treated wastewater, raw wastewater, and sludge samples, had an average of 0.02, 1.24 and 67 ova, respectively. The result of this study indicated that qPCR can be used for the quantification of hookworm ova from wastewater and sludge samples; however, caution is advised in interpreting qPCR generated data for health risk assessment. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ecuador | 2 | 40% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 43% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 29% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 29% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 21% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 14% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 7% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 2 | 14% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 07 July 2017.
All research outputs
#15,173,117
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Environmental Sciences (Elsevier)
#415
of 1,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,401
of 324,937 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Environmental Sciences (Elsevier)
#10
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,102 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 324,937 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 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 57% of its contemporaries.