↓ Skip to main content

An enteric virus can replace the beneficial function of commensal bacteria

Overview of attention for article published in Nature, November 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 (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (86th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
179 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
488 Mendeley
Title
An enteric virus can replace the beneficial function of commensal bacteria
Published in
Nature, November 2014
DOI 10.1038/nature13960
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elisabeth Kernbauer, Yi Ding, Ken Cadwell

Abstract

Intestinal microbial communities have profound effects on host physiology. Whereas the symbiotic contribution of commensal bacteria is well established, the role of eukaryotic viruses that are present in the gastrointestinal tract under homeostatic conditions is undefined. Here we demonstrate that a common enteric RNA virus can replace the beneficial function of commensal bacteria in the intestine. Murine norovirus (MNV) infection of germ-free or antibiotic-treated mice restored intestinal morphology and lymphocyte function without inducing overt inflammation and disease. The presence of MNV also suppressed an expansion of group 2 innate lymphoid cells observed in the absence of bacteria, and induced transcriptional changes in the intestine associated with immune development and type I interferon (IFN) signalling. Consistent with this observation, the IFN-α receptor was essential for the ability of MNV to compensate for bacterial depletion. Importantly, MNV infection offset the deleterious effect of treatment with antibiotics in models of intestinal injury and pathogenic bacterial infection. These data indicate that eukaryotic viruses have the capacity to support intestinal homeostasis and shape mucosal immunity, similarly to commensal bacteria.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 187 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 488 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 26 5%
Netherlands 4 <1%
Canada 3 <1%
Spain 3 <1%
Germany 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
France 2 <1%
Brazil 2 <1%
Other 7 1%
Unknown 435 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 141 29%
Researcher 121 25%
Student > Bachelor 51 10%
Student > Master 48 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 28 6%
Other 99 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 257 53%
Immunology and Microbiology 68 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 53 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 51 10%
Unspecified 28 6%
Other 31 6%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 250. 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 19 January 2017.
All research outputs
#41,668
of 12,276,449 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#4,693
of 62,183 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#924
of 267,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#127
of 910 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,276,449 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 62,183 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 73.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 267,138 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 910 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.