↓ Skip to main content

Development and validation of IIKC: an interactive identification key for Culicoides (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) females from the Western Palaearctic region

Overview of attention for article published in Parasites & Vectors, July 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
123 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
96 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
Development and validation of IIKC: an interactive identification key for Culicoides (Diptera: Ceratopogonidae) females from the Western Palaearctic region
Published in
Parasites & Vectors, July 2012
DOI 10.1186/1756-3305-5-137
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bruno Mathieu, Catherine Cêtre-Sossah, Claire Garros, David Chavernac, Thomas Balenghien, Simon Carpenter, Marie-Laure Setier-Rio, Régine Vignes-Lebbe, Visotheary Ung, Ermanno Candolfi, Jean-Claude Delécolle

Abstract

The appearance of bluetongue virus (BTV) in 2006 within northern Europe exposed a lack of expertise and resources available across this region to enable the accurate morphological identification of species of Culicoides Latreille biting midges, some of which are the major vectors of this pathogen. This work aims to organise extant Culicoides taxonomic knowledge into a database and to produce an interactive identification key for females of Culicoides in the Western Palaearctic (IIKC: Interactive identification key for Culicoides). We then validated IIKC using a trial carried out by six entomologists based in this region with variable degrees of experience in identifying Culicoides.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 2%
France 2 2%
China 1 1%
Unknown 91 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 15%
Student > Master 9 9%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 19 20%
Unknown 17 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 35%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 18 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 9%
Environmental Science 5 5%
Unspecified 5 5%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 19 20%
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 13 August 2012.
All research outputs
#18,312,024
of 22,673,450 outputs
Outputs from Parasites & Vectors
#4,191
of 5,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,811
of 164,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Parasites & Vectors
#39
of 59 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,673,450 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,427 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 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 164,615 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 59 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.