↓ Skip to main content

Fungal Biofilms and related infections

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 6: The Extracellular Matrix of Fungal Biofilms
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (61st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 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.
Chapter title
The Extracellular Matrix of Fungal Biofilms
Chapter number 6
Book title
Fungal Biofilms and related infections
Published in
Advances in experimental medicine and biology, June 2016
DOI 10.1007/5584_2016_6
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-942359-3, 978-3-31-942360-9
Authors

Mitchell, Kaitlin F, Zarnowski, Robert, Andes, David R, Kaitlin F. Mitchell, Robert Zarnowski, David R. Andes, Mitchell, Kaitlin F., Andes, David R.

Abstract

A key feature of biofilms is their production of an extracellular matrix. This material covers the biofilm cells, providing a protective barrier to the surrounding environment. During an infection setting, this can include such offenses as host cells and products of the immune system as well as drugs used for treatment. Studies over the past two decades have revealed the matrix from different biofilm species to be as diverse as the microbes themselves. This chapter will review the composition and roles of matrix from fungal biofilms, with primary focus on Candida species, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Aspergillus fumigatus, and Cryptococcus neoformans. Additional coverage will be provided on the antifungal resistance proffered by the Candida albicans matrix, which has been studied in the most depth. A brief section on the matrix produced by bacterial biofilms will be provided for comparison. Current tools for studying the matrix will also be discussed, as well as suggestions for areas of future study in this field.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 99 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 14 14%
Researcher 13 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 31 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 22 22%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 2%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 36 36%
Attention Score in Context

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 09 June 2016.
All research outputs
#17,113,100
of 25,837,817 outputs
Outputs from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#2,470
of 5,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,739
of 358,579 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in experimental medicine and biology
#43
of 136 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,837,817 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,280 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% 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 358,579 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 136 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.