↓ Skip to main content

Impact of Sylvatic Plague Vaccine on Non-target Small Rodents in Grassland Ecosystems

Overview of attention for article published in EcoHealth, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (83rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
7 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 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
Impact of Sylvatic Plague Vaccine on Non-target Small Rodents in Grassland Ecosystems
Published in
EcoHealth, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10393-018-1334-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gebbiena M. Bron, Katherine L. D. Richgels, Michael D. Samuel, Julia E. Poje, Faye Lorenzsonn, Jonathan P. Matteson, Jesse T. Boulerice, Jorge E. Osorio, Tonie E. Rocke

Abstract

Oral vaccination is an emerging management strategy to reduce the prevalence of high impact infectious diseases within wild animal populations. Plague is a flea-borne zoonosis of rodents that often decimates prairie dog (Cynomys spp.) colonies in the western USA. Recently, an oral sylvatic plague vaccine (SPV) was developed to protect prairie dogs from plague and aid recovery of the endangered black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes). Although oral vaccination programs are targeted toward specific species, field distribution of vaccine-laden baits can result in vaccine uptake by non-target animals and unintended indirect effects. We assessed the impact of SPV on non-target rodents at paired vaccine and placebo-treated prairie dog colonies in four US states from 2013 to 2015. Bait consumption by non-target rodents was high (70.8%, n = 3113), but anti-plague antibody development on vaccine plots was low (23.7%, n = 266). In addition, no significant differences were noted in combined deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus) and western harvest mouse (Reithrodontomys megalotis) abundance or community evenness and richness of non-target rodents between vaccine-treated and placebo plots. In our 3-year field study, we could not detect a significant positive or negative effect of SPV application on non-target rodents.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 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 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 33%
Student > Bachelor 3 20%
Student > Master 3 20%
Professor 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 1 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 47%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 7%
Social Sciences 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 1 7%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 11 October 2018.
All research outputs
#1,326,336
of 16,569,218 outputs
Outputs from EcoHealth
#89
of 618 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#37,245
of 282,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EcoHealth
#3
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,569,218 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 618 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 282,451 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.