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 |
Mosquitoes Used to Draw Blood for Arbovirus Viremia Determinations in Small Vertebrates
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0099342 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rebekah C. Kading, Brad J. Biggerstaff, Ginger Young, Nicholas Komar |
| Abstract |
Serial samples from the same individuals may be required for certain virological studies, however, some small animals cannot easily be blood-sampled. Therefore, we evaluated the use of Culex quinquefasciatus Say and Aedes albopictus Skuse mosquitoes as "biological syringes" to draw blood for virus titer determinations in small vertebrates. Groups of chicks (Gallus gallus), hamsters (Mesocricetus auratus), and house sparrows (Passer domesticus) were experimentally infected with West Nile virus (WNV) or Highlands J virus (HJV). In general, good correlation was seen between mosquito- and syringe-derived blood samples at titers ≥5.0 log10 pfu/mL serum as compared with titers <5.0 log10 pfu/mL serum for chicks, hamsters, and sparrows. Ninety-two percent (24/26) of sparrows with virus titers >105 pfu/mL serum had mosquito- and syringe-derived titers within one log of each other. Sparrow viremia profiles generated from single mosquito blood meals and syringe were not significantly different (p>0.05). This technique is valuable for assessing the roles of small vertebrates in the ecologies of arboviruses, and could be used in applications beyond virology and infectious diseases, when <10 µL of whole blood is required. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 3% |
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 38 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 28% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 13% |
| Other | 2 | 5% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 4 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 33% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 10% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 4 | 10% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 3 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 11 | 28% |
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 06 June 2014.
All research outputs
#18,373,576
of 22,757,090 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#154,407
of 194,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#163,859
of 228,023 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,227
of 4,366 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,090 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,183 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 228,023 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,366 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.