↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of DNA Microarray, Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification (LAMP) and Real-Time PCR with DNA Sequencing for Identification of Fusarium spp. Obtained from Patients with Hematologic…

Overview of attention for article published in Mycopathologia, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
14 Mendeley
Title
Comparison of DNA Microarray, Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification (LAMP) and Real-Time PCR with DNA Sequencing for Identification of Fusarium spp. Obtained from Patients with Hematologic Malignancies
Published in
Mycopathologia, March 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11046-017-0129-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marcela de Souza, Tetsuhiro Matsuzawa, Kanae Sakai, Yasunori Muraosa, Luzia Lyra, Ariane Fidelis Busso-Lopes, Anna Sara Shafferman Levin, Angélica Zaninelli Schreiber, Yuzuru Mikami, Tohoru Gonoi, Katsuhiko Kamei, Maria Luiza Moretti, Plínio Trabasso

Abstract

The performance of three molecular biology techniques, i.e., DNA microarray, loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), and real-time PCR were compared with DNA sequencing for properly identification of 20 isolates of Fusarium spp. obtained from blood stream as etiologic agent of invasive infections in patients with hematologic malignancies. DNA microarray, LAMP and real-time PCR identified 16 (80%) out of 20 samples as Fusarium solani species complex (FSSC) and four (20%) as Fusarium spp. The agreement among the techniques was 100%. LAMP exhibited 100% specificity, while DNA microarray, LAMP and real-time PCR showed 100% sensitivity. The three techniques had 100% agreement with DNA sequencing. Sixteen isolates were identified as FSSC by sequencing, being five Fusarium keratoplasticum, nine Fusarium petroliphilum and two Fusarium solani. On the other hand, sequencing identified four isolates as Fusarium non-solani species complex (FNSSC), being three isolates as Fusarium napiforme and one isolate as Fusarium oxysporum. Finally, LAMP proved to be faster and more accessible than DNA microarray and real-time PCR, since it does not require a thermocycler. Therefore, LAMP signalizes as emerging and promising methodology to be used in routine identification of Fusarium spp. among cases of invasive fungal infections.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 14 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 29%
Student > Master 3 21%
Professor 2 14%
Student > Postgraduate 1 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 7%
Other 3 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 43%
Unspecified 2 14%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 14%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 7%
Other 2 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 29 March 2017.
All research outputs
#4,702,062
of 9,264,233 outputs
Outputs from Mycopathologia
#290
of 592 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#134,258
of 260,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Mycopathologia
#6
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,264,233 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 592 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
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 260,330 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.