↓ Skip to main content

Isolation and molecular identification of the etiological agents of streptococcosis in Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) cultured in net cages in Lake Sentani, Papua, Indonesia

Overview of attention for article published in SpringerPlus, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
120 Mendeley
Title
Isolation and molecular identification of the etiological agents of streptococcosis in Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) cultured in net cages in Lake Sentani, Papua, Indonesia
Published in
SpringerPlus, October 2014
DOI 10.1186/2193-1801-3-627
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hilal Anshary, Rio A Kurniawan, Sriwulan, Ramli, Dolores V Baxa

Abstract

Infections with Streptococcus spp. were observed in Nile tilapia cultured in net cages in Lake Sentani, Papua, Indonesia. Clinical signs included exophthalmia, erratic swimming, ascites in abdominal cavity, and external hemorrhages. Four types of bacterial colonies (SK, K10, P20, and M12) were isolated from the brain, kidney, and eyes. Based on phenotypic and genetic (16S rDNA sequencing) characteristics, the isolates were identified as Streptococcus iniae (SK), Streptococcus agalactiae (K10 and P20) and Lactococcus garvieae (M12). The latter species has not been previously isolated or reported from fish streptococcosis in Indonesia. Intraperitoneal injection of healthy tilapia with the bacterial species caused significant morbidity (70%) within 3 days and 100% mortality at 6 days post injection. Experimental infections and reisolation of the bacteria from morbid and dead fish suggest they are the causative agents of streptococcosis, which rendered high mortality among cage cultured Nile tilapia in Lake Sentani. Our results suggest the need for developing diagnostic tools for accurate identification of the agents of streptococcosis. As tilapia aquaculture continues to expand as a means of food production and livelihood in Indonesia, it becomes crucial to ensure that fish resources are monitored and protected from the adverse effects of infectious diseases.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter 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 120 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 120 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 17%
Student > Bachelor 15 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 9%
Researcher 10 8%
Lecturer 8 7%
Other 27 23%
Unknown 29 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 24%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 16 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 6%
Other 21 18%
Unknown 32 27%

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 14 November 2014.
All research outputs
#14,777,758
of 16,752,553 outputs
Outputs from SpringerPlus
#1,421
of 1,807 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,628
of 234,312 outputs
Outputs of similar age from SpringerPlus
#200
of 218 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,752,553 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 1,807 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. 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 234,312 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 218 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.