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 |
Ticks and associated pathogens collected from cats in Sicily and Calabria (Italy)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Parasites & Vectors, October 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13071-015-1128-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Maria-Grazia Pennisi, Maria-Flaminia Persichetti, Lorena Serrano, Laura Altet, Stefano Reale, Laura Gulotta, Laia Solano-Gallego |
| Abstract |
Limited information is available about the species of ticks infesting the cat and the pathogens that they harbor. The aims of the present study were to identify the species of ticks removed from cats living in Sicily and Calabria (Italy) and to detect DNA of vector-borne pathogens in the same ticks. Morphological identification of 132 adult ticks collected throughout the year from cats was carried out. Real-time PCRs for Hepatozoon felis, Piroplasmid, Ehrlichia/Anaplasma spp., Rickettsia spp., Bartonella spp., Mycoplasma spp. and Leishmania infantum were performed from each individual tick. Ticks belonging to Rhipicephalus (R. sanguineus sensu lato, R. pusillus) and Ixodes (I. ricinus, I. ventalloi) genera were identified. Ixodes ventalloi was the most frequently found tick species (47 %). The positivity rate to at least one pathogen was 14.4 % (19/132 ticks). Leishmania infantum, Rickettsia spp. (R. monacensis and R. helvetica), Bartonella spp. (B. clarridgeiae), Piroplasmid (Babesia vogeli), and Ehrlichia/Anaplasma spp. (E. canis) DNAs were amplified in 8.3, 5.3, 1.5, 0.75 and 0.75 % of ticks, respectively. Hepatozoon felis, Anaplasma spp. and hemotropic Mycoplasma spp. DNAs were not detected. Four (21.1 %) out of nineteen positive ticks were co-infected. This study provides novel data about ticks infesting cats and the DNA of pathogens that they harbor. In Southern Italy, anti-tick prophylaxis should be implemented throughout the year in cats without neglecting winter time. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Brazil | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 74 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 19% |
| Researcher | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Other | 8 | 10% |
| Other | 12 | 15% |
| Unknown | 12 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 21 | 27% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 19 | 24% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 4% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 17 | 22% |
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 25 October 2015.
All research outputs
#17,774,664
of 22,829,683 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#3,816
of 5,465 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#187,398
of 278,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#103
of 156 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,829,683 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,465 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 278,126 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 156 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.