↓ Skip to main content

Avian Influenza Virus Antibodies in Pacific Coast Red Knots (Calidris canutus roselaari)

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Wildlife Diseases, July 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (57th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
Avian Influenza Virus Antibodies in Pacific Coast Red Knots (Calidris canutus roselaari)
Published in
Journal of Wildlife Diseases, July 2014
DOI 10.7589/2013-04-016
Pubmed ID
Authors

James A. Johnson, Lucas H. DeCicco, Daniel R. Ruthrauff, Scott Krauss, Jeffrey S. Hall

Abstract

Abstract Prevalence of avian influenza virus (AIV) antibodies in the western Atlantic subspecies of Red Knot (Calidris canutus rufa) is among the highest for any shorebird. To assess whether the frequency of detection of AIV antibodies is high for the species in general or restricted only to C. c. rufa, we sampled the northeastern Pacific Coast subspecies of Red Knot (Calidris canutus roselaari) breeding in northwestern Alaska. Antibodies were detected in 90% of adults and none of the chicks sampled. Viral shedding was not detected in adults or chicks. These results suggest a predisposition of Red Knots to AIV infection. High antibody titers to subtypes H3 and H4 were detected, whereas low to intermediate antibody levels were found for subtypes H10 and H11. These four subtypes have previously been detected in shorebirds at Delaware Bay (at the border of New Jersey and Delaware) and in waterfowl along the Pacific Coast of North America.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 9%
Unknown 29 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 38%
Other 10 31%
Student > Postgraduate 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 6%
Student > Master 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 1 3%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 31%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 9 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 28%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Unknown 2 6%

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 23 May 2014.
All research outputs
#7,111,642
of 12,821,089 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Wildlife Diseases
#263
of 427 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,322
of 189,534 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Wildlife Diseases
#7
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,821,089 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 427 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 189,534 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.