↓ Skip to main content

Limited Specificity in the Injury and Infection Priming against Bacteria in Aedes aegypti Mosquitoes

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Limited Specificity in the Injury and Infection Priming against Bacteria in Aedes aegypti Mosquitoes
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2016.00975
Pubmed ID
Authors

Valeria Vargas, Miguel Moreno-García, Erika Duarte-Elguea, Humberto Lanz-Mendoza

Abstract

Injury and infection priming has been observed in several insect groups, reported as host immune protection against contact with a pathogen caused by a previous infection with the same. However, the specific response against a pathogen has not been demonstrated in all insect species. Investigating the specific priming response in insects is important because their immune strategies probably reflect particular selective pressures exerted by different pathogens. Here, we determined whether previous infection of Aedes aegypti would enhance survival and/or lead to greater and specific AMP expression after a second exposure to the same or a distinct bacterium. Mosquitoes previously immunized with a low dose of Escherichia coli, but not Staphylococcus aureus, showed increased survival. Although the host protection herein demonstrated was not specific, each bacterium elicited differential AMP expression. These results can be explained by the susceptible-primed-infected (SPI) epidemiological model, which poses that in the evolution of memory-like responses (priming), a pivotal role is played by pathogen virulence, associated host damage, and the host capacity of pathogen recognition.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 42 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 26%
Researcher 11 26%
Professor 3 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Student > Master 2 5%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 9 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 40%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 9%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 5%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 12 28%
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 25 June 2016.
All research outputs
#20,334,427
of 22,879,161 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#22,498
of 24,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#305,296
of 352,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#454
of 533 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,879,161 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 24,902 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 352,770 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 533 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.