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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Failure to detect M. avium subspecies paratuberculosis in Johne’s disease using a proprietary fluorescent in situ hybridization assay
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Research Notes, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13104-018-3601-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Robert J. Greenstein, Liya Su, Peter S. Fam, Judy R. Stabel, Sheldon T. Brown |
| Abstract |
Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis (MAP) causes Johne's disease in ruminants. The "gold standard" of MAP detection is by culture, DNA sequencing possibly supplemented by identification of Ziehl-Neelsen positive mycobacteria. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a proprietary (Affymetrix™ RNA view®) fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) assay for MAP RNA. Intestine from a steer with documented Johne's disease was assayed according to the manufacturer's instructions. Probes were custom designed for MAP and bovine β-actin (as the eukaryotic housekeeping gene) from published genomes. We attempt to prevent false positive signal in the "no-probe" control, by modifying wash solutions, using recommended hydrochloric acid titration and different fluorescent filters (TritC for Texas Red and "Hope" for Cy-5). Repetitively, false positive signal was observed in our "no probe" negative control. Attempts to correct this according to the manufacturers suggestions, and with multiple derivative techniques have been unsuccessful. It is concluded that when performed according to manufactures instruction and with multiple variations on the manufactures recommended suggestions to correct for false positive signal, that the Affymetrix™ RNA view® cannot be used to detect MAP in pre-frozen intestine of cattle with Johne's disease. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Ireland | 1 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 45% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 9% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 27% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 27% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 2 | 18% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 18% |
| Unknown | 1 | 9% |
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 25 July 2018.
All research outputs
#14,136,687
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,876
of 4,287 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,025
of 329,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#52
of 154 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,287 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 329,030 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 154 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 64% of its contemporaries.