↓ Skip to main content

Using Bloodmeal Analysis to Assess Disease Risk to Wildlife at the New Northern Limit of a Mosquito Species

Overview of attention for article published in EcoHealth, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
Title
Using Bloodmeal Analysis to Assess Disease Risk to Wildlife at the New Northern Limit of a Mosquito Species
Published in
EcoHealth, September 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10393-018-1371-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrea Egizi, Ellen S. Martinsen, Holly Vuong, Kelly I. Zimmerman, Ary Faraji, Dina M. Fonseca

Abstract

The historically southeastern mosquito species Culex erraticus has over the last 30 years undergone a marked expansion north. We evaluated this species' potential to participate in local disease cycles in the northeastern USA by identifying the vertebrate sources of blood in Cx. erraticus specimens from New Jersey. We found that the majority of bloodmeals (92.6%) were derived from birds, followed by 6.8% from mammals (of which half were human), and a single amphibian bloodmeal from a spring peeper (0.56%). Medium- and large-sized water birds from the order Pelecaniformes made up 60.4% of the bird species and 55.9% of all identified hosts. This group of birds is known enzootic hosts of arboviruses such as eastern equine encephalitis virus, for which Cx. erraticus is a competent vector. Additionally, we screened blooded mosquitoes for avian malaria parasites and identified three different lineages of Plasmodium, including what may represent a new Plasmodium species (likely a wetland bird specialist) in bloodmeals from Green Herons, a Great Egret, and a Double-Crested Cormorant. Our results support the utility of mosquito bloodmeals as sources of information about circulating wildlife pathogens and reveal the potential of range-expanding species to intensify local zoonoses and bridge enzootic pathogens to humans.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 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 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 20%
Student > Master 4 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Other 5 20%
Unknown 4 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 36%
Environmental Science 3 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 12%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 4%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 5 20%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 04 March 2019.
All research outputs
#2,135,808
of 13,810,416 outputs
Outputs from EcoHealth
#135
of 526 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,996
of 269,792 outputs
Outputs of similar age from EcoHealth
#7
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,810,416 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 526 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 269,792 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 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 56% of its contemporaries.