↓ Skip to main content

Crystal Violet and XTT Assays on Staphylococcus aureus Biofilm Quantification

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
42 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
Title
Crystal Violet and XTT Assays on Staphylococcus aureus Biofilm Quantification
Published in
Current Microbiology, June 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00284-016-1081-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Zhenbo Xu, Yanrui Liang, Shiqi Lin, Dingqiang Chen, Bing Li, Lin Li, Yang Deng

Abstract

Staphylococcus aureus (S. Aureus) is a common food-borne pathogenic microorganism. Biofilm formation remains the major obstruction for bacterial elimination. The study aims at providing a basis for determining S. aureus biofilm formation. 257 clinical samples of S. aureus isolates were identified by routine analysis and multiplex PCR detection and found to contain 227 MRSA, 16 MSSA, 11 MRCNS, and 3 MSCNS strains. Two assays for quantification of S. aureus biofilm formation, the crystal violet (CV) assay and the XTT (tetrazolium salt reduction) assay, were optimized, evaluated, and further compared. In CV assay, most isolates formed weak biofilm 74.3 %), while the rest formed moderate biofilm (23.3 %) or strong biofilm (2.3 %). However, most isolates in XTT assay showed weak metabolic activity (77.0 %), while the rest showed moderate metabolic activity (17.9 %) or high metabolic activity (5.1 %). In this study, we found a distinct strain-to-strain dissimilarity in terms of both biomass formation and metabolic activity, and it was concluded from this study that two assays were mutual complementation rather than being comparison.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 2%
Unknown 55 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 18%
Unspecified 9 16%
Student > Bachelor 8 14%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Other 11 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 25%
Unspecified 12 21%
Immunology and Microbiology 8 14%
Chemistry 5 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 9%
Other 12 21%

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 June 2016.
All research outputs
#9,381,519
of 12,229,156 outputs
Outputs from Current Microbiology
#1,026
of 1,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,639
of 270,753 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Microbiology
#17
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,229,156 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,376 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 270,753 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 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 55% of its contemporaries.