↓ Skip to main content

Safety, beneficial and technological properties of Enterococcus faecium isolated from Brazilian cheeses.

Overview of attention for article published in Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 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
Safety, beneficial and technological properties of Enterococcus faecium isolated from Brazilian cheeses.
Published in
Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, March 2015
DOI 10.1590/s1517-838246120131245
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dos Santos, Karina Maria Olbrich, Vieira, Antônio Diogo Silva, Salles, Hévila Oliveira, Oliveira, Jacqueline da Silva, Rocha, Cíntia Renata Costa, Borges, Maria de Fátima, Bruno, Laura Maria, Franco, Bernadette Dora Gombossy de Melo, Todorov, Svetoslav Dimitrov

Abstract

This study aimed to characterize the safety and technological properties of Enterococcus faecium strains isolated from Brazilian Coalho cheeses. High levels of co-aggregation were observed between Enterococcus faecium strains EM485 and EM925 and both Escherichia coli and Clostridium perfringens . Both strains presented low levels of hydrophobicity. E. faecium EM485 and EM925 were both able to grow in the presence of 0.5% of the sodium salts of taurocholic acid (TC), taurodeoxycholic acid (TDC), glycocholic acid (GC), and glycodeoxycholic acid (GDC), although they showed the ability to deconjugate only GDC and TDC. Both strains showed good survival when exposed to conditions simulating the gastro intestinal tract (GIT). When tested for the presence of virulence genes, only tyrosine decarboxylase and vancomycin B generated positive PCR results.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Researcher 4 7%
Student > Master 4 7%
Other 15 27%
Unknown 11 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 15 27%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 17 31%

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 30 July 2015.
All research outputs
#8,475,673
of 9,724,852 outputs
Outputs from Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
#62
of 111 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,463
of 234,222 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brazilian Journal of Microbiology
#27
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,724,852 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 111 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.0. 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 234,222 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 33 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.