↓ Skip to main content

The giant ciliate Zoothamnium niveum and its thiotrophic epibiont Candidatus Thiobios zoothamnicoli: a model system to study interspecies cooperation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 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
The giant ciliate Zoothamnium niveum and its thiotrophic epibiont Candidatus Thiobios zoothamnicoli: a model system to study interspecies cooperation
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, April 2014
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2014.00145
Pubmed ID
Authors

Monika Bright, Salvador Espada-Hinojosa, Ilias Lagkouvardos, Jean-Marie Volland

Abstract

Symbioses between chemoautotrophic sulfur-oxidizing (thiotrophic) bacteria and protists or animals are among the most diverse and prevalent in the ocean. They are extremely difficult to maintain in aquaria and no thiotrophic symbiosis involving an animal host has ever been successfully cultivated. In contrast, we have cultivated the giant ciliate Zoothamnium niveum and its obligate ectosymbiont Candidatus Thiobios zoothamnicoli in small flow-through aquaria. This review provides an overview of the host and the symbiont and their phylogenetic relationships. We summarize our knowledge on the ecology, geographic distribution and life cycle of the host, on the vertical transmission of the symbiont, and on the cultivation of this symbiosis. We then discuss the benefits and costs involved in this cooperation compared with other thiotrophic symbioses and outline our view on the evolution and persistence of this byproduct mutualism.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Czechia 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 67 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 24%
Student > Master 16 23%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Researcher 7 10%
Other 7 10%
Other 4 6%
Unknown 11 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 32%
Environmental Science 10 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 4%
Earth and Planetary Sciences 3 4%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 16 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 18 March 2023.
All research outputs
#3,241,124
of 23,556,846 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#2,993
of 26,044 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#33,205
of 229,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#17
of 155 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,556,846 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 26,044 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 229,404 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 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 155 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.