↓ Skip to main content

Morphological, histological and molecular characterization of Myxobolus kingchowensis and Thelohanellus cf. sinensis infecting gibel carp Carassius auratus gibelio (Bloch, 1782)

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Parasitologica, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
8 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
Morphological, histological and molecular characterization of Myxobolus kingchowensis and Thelohanellus cf. sinensis infecting gibel carp Carassius auratus gibelio (Bloch, 1782)
Published in
Acta Parasitologica, April 2018
DOI 10.1515/ap-2018-0026
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bo Zhang, Yanhua Zhai, Zemao Gu, Yang Liu

Abstract

A Myxobolus species and a Thelohanellus species infecting Carassius auratus gibelio (Bloch, 1782) were redescribed by their morphological, histological and molecular characterization. In the present study, the Myxobolus species infecting the muscle was identified as Myxobolus kingchowensis Chen et Ma, 1998 by the morphological and molecular data. Histologically, mature spores of M. kingchowensis were observed in the intercellular and connective tissue of muscle, though the plasmodia were not found. In addition, scattered spores also occurred in the intercellular of haematopoietic cells, intraepithelial of the renal tubules and interior of the melano-macrophage centres. Phylogenetic analysis showed that M. kingchowensis clustered in the clade of muscle-infecting Myxobolus species, further supporting muscle as the infection site of M. kingchowensis. The present Thelohanellus species infecting the gills was identified conspecific as Thelohanellus sinensis reported in Sun (2006) (mark it as T. sinensis-Sun)based on spore morphology, biological traits (host specificity and organ specificity), and molecular data. However, compared with the original description of T. sinensis Chen et Hsieh, 1960, the present Thelohanellus species and T. sinensis-Sun both infecting the gills of gibel carp are distinguishable from the original description in the host and infection site, which made the validity of T. sinensis-Sun dubious. Due to the absence of molecular data in the original description of T. sinensis, we suggest marking the present species and T. sinensis-Sun as T. cf. sinensis to avoid the confusion until T. sinensis is obtained from the type host and type infection site.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 2 25%
Researcher 2 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 13%
Unknown 3 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 38%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 13%
Unknown 3 38%
Attention Score in Context

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 15 April 2018.
All research outputs
#22,767,715
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Acta Parasitologica
#481
of 735 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#301,940
of 342,076 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Parasitologica
#11
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 735 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 342,076 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.