↓ Skip to main content

Sampling Strategies and Biodiversity of Influenza A Subtypes in Wild Birds

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS ONE, March 2014
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 (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
6 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
17 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
67 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
Sampling Strategies and Biodiversity of Influenza A Subtypes in Wild Birds
Published in
PLoS ONE, March 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0090826
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sarah H. Olson, Jane Parmley, Catherine Soos, Martin Gilbert, Neus Latorre-Margalef, Jeffrey S. Hall, Phillip M. Hansbro, Frederick Leighton, Vincent Munster, Damien Joly

Abstract

Wild aquatic birds are recognized as the natural reservoir of avian influenza A viruses (AIV), but across high and low pathogenic AIV strains, scientists have yet to rigorously identify most competent hosts for the various subtypes. We examined 11,870 GenBank records to provide a baseline inventory and insight into patterns of global AIV subtype diversity and richness. Further, we conducted an extensive literature review and communicated directly with scientists to accumulate data from 50 non-overlapping studies and over 250,000 birds to assess the status of historic sampling effort. We then built virus subtype sample-based accumulation curves to better estimate sample size targets that capture a specific percentage of virus subtype richness at seven sampling locations. Our study identifies a sampling methodology that will detect an estimated 75% of circulating virus subtypes from a targeted bird population and outlines future surveillance and research priorities that are needed to explore the influence of host and virus biodiversity on emergence and transmission.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 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 67 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sudan 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
Japan 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 61 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 21%
Student > Master 8 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Professor 5 7%
Other 16 24%
Unknown 1 1%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 30 45%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 9 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 10%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 7%
Environmental Science 4 6%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 5 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 65. 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 01 January 2015.
All research outputs
#344,393
of 15,834,367 outputs
Outputs from PLoS ONE
#5,781
of 156,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,741
of 190,418 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS ONE
#254
of 5,317 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,834,367 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 156,822 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 190,418 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,317 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 95% of its contemporaries.