↓ Skip to main content

Impact of Thiamethoxam on Honey Bee Queen (Apis mellifera carnica) Reproductive Morphology and Physiology

Overview of attention for article published in Bulletin of Environmental Contamination & Toxicology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
Impact of Thiamethoxam on Honey Bee Queen (Apis mellifera carnica) Reproductive Morphology and Physiology
Published in
Bulletin of Environmental Contamination & Toxicology, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00128-017-2144-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ivana Tlak Gajger, Martina Sakač, Aleš Gregorc

Abstract

High honey bee losses around the world have been linked in part by the regular use of neonicotinoids in agriculture. In light of the current situation, the aim of this study was to investigate the effects of thiamethoxam on the development of the reproductive system and physiology in the honey bee queen. Two experimental groups of honey bee queen larvae were treated with thiamethoxam during artificial rearing, applied via artificial feed in two cycles. In the first rearing cycle, honey bee larvae received a single treatment dose (4.28 ng thiamethoxam/queen larva on the 4th day after larvae grafting in artificial queen cells), while the second honey bee queen rearing cycle received a double treatment dose (total of 8.56 ng thiamethoxam/queen larva on the 4th and 5th day after larvae grafting in artificial queen cells). After emerging, queens were anesthetized and weighed, and after mating with drones were anesthetized, weighed, and sectioned. Ovary mass and number of stored sperm were determined. Body weight differed between untreated and treated honey bee queens. The results also show a decrease in the number of sperm within honey bee queen spermathecae that received the double thiamethoxam dose.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 38 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 18%
Unspecified 5 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 13%
Professor 3 8%
Other 8 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 50%
Unspecified 9 24%
Environmental Science 4 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 3%
Other 2 5%

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 22 August 2017.
All research outputs
#9,309,587
of 11,642,880 outputs
Outputs from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination & Toxicology
#1,743
of 2,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#194,291
of 265,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Bulletin of Environmental Contamination & Toxicology
#18
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,642,880 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 2,467 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.6. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 265,785 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 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 52% of its contemporaries.