↓ Skip to main content

A Nod to disease vectors: mitigation of pathogen sensing by arthropod saliva

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
19 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
A Nod to disease vectors: mitigation of pathogen sensing by arthropod saliva
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2013.00308
Pubmed ID
Authors

Olivia S. Sakhon, Maiara S. Severo, Michail Kotsyfakis, Joao H. F. Pedra

Abstract

Arthropod saliva possesses anti-hemostatic, anesthetic, and anti-inflammatory properties that facilitate feeding and, inadvertently, dissemination of pathogens. Vector-borne diseases caused by these pathogens affect millions of people each year. Many studies address the impact of arthropod salivary proteins on various immunological components. However, whether and how arthropod saliva counters Nod-like (NLR) sensing remains elusive. NLRs are innate immune pattern recognition molecules involved in detecting microbial molecules and danger signals. Nod1/2 signaling results in activation of the nuclear factor-κB and the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathways. Caspase-1 NLRs regulate the inflammasome~- a protein scaffold that governs the maturation of interleukin (IL)-1β and IL-18. Recently, several vector-borne pathogens have been shown to induce NLR activation in immune cells. Here, we provide a brief overview of NLR signaling and discuss clinically relevant vector-borne pathogens recognized by NLR pathways. We also elaborate on possible anti-inflammatory effects of arthropod saliva on NLR signaling and microbial pathogenesis for the purpose of exchanging research perspectives.

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 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 32%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 21%
Student > Master 4 21%
Student > Postgraduate 2 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 47%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 21%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 16%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 11%
Unknown 1 5%
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 21 October 2013.
All research outputs
#20,207,295
of 22,727,570 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#22,176
of 24,584 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,792
of 280,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#264
of 407 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,727,570 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 24,584 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. 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 280,760 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 407 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.