↓ Skip to main content

Brucella pinnipedialis in hooded seal (Cystophora cristata) primary epithelial cells

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
Brucella pinnipedialis in hooded seal (Cystophora cristata) primary epithelial cells
Published in
Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13028-016-0188-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anett Kristin Larsen, Jacques Godfroid, Ingebjørg Helena Nymo

Abstract

Marine Brucella spp. have been isolated from numerous pinniped and cetacean species, but pathological findings in association with infection with Brucella pinnipedialis in pinnipeds have been sparse. The capacity of brucellae to survive and replicate within host macrophages underlies their important ability to produce chronic infections, but previous work has shown that B. pinnipedialis spp. are rapidly eliminated from hooded seal (Cystophora cristata) alveolar macrophages. To investigate if multiplication could take place in other hooded seal cell types, primary epithelial cells were isolated, verified to express the epithelial marker cytokeratin and challenged with three different strains of B. pinnipedialis; B. pinnipedialis sp. nov., B. pinnipedialis hooded seal strain B17, and B. pinnipedialis hooded seal strain 22F1. All strains were steadily eliminated and the amounts of intracellular bacteria were reduced to less than one-third by 48 h post infection. Intracellular presence was verified using immunocytochemistry. So far, intracellular multiplication in seal cells has not been documented for B. pinnipedialis. The lack of intracellular survival in macrophages, as well as in epithelial cells, together with the fact that pathological changes due to B. pinnipedialis infection is not yet identified in seals, suggests that the bacteria may only cause a mild, acute and transient infection. These findings also contribute to substantiate the hypothesis that seals may not be the primary host of B. pinnipedialis and that the transmission to seals are caused by other species in the marine environment.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 10%
Professor 3 10%
Researcher 3 10%
Other 8 28%
Unknown 3 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 48%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 10%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 10%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 7%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 2 7%
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 20 March 2016.
All research outputs
#20,656,820
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica
#553
of 837 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#300,016
of 405,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica
#11
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 837 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 405,662 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.