The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Plague in a Colony of Gunnison's Prairie Dogs (Cynomys gunnisoni) Despite Three Years of Infusions of Burrows with 0.05 Deltamethrin to Kill Fleas
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Wildlife Diseases, December 2017
|
| DOI | 10.7589/2017-04-089 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
John L. Hoogland, Dean E. Biggins, Nathaniel Blackford, David A. Eads, Dustin Long, Mariana Rivera Rodriguez, Lauren M. Ross, Sarah Tobey, Emma M. White |
| Abstract |
At Valles Caldera National Preserve in New Mexico, USA, infusing Gunnison's prairie dog ( Cynomys gunnisoni) burrows with an insecticide dust containing 0.05% deltamethrin killed fleas which transmit bubonic plague. The reduction in the number of fleas per prairie dog was significant and dramatic immediately after infusions, with a suggestion that the reduction persisted for as long as 12 mo. Despite the lower flea counts, however, a plague epizootic killed >95% of prairie dogs after 3 yr of infusions (once per year). More research is necessary for a better understanding of the efficacy of insecticide dusts at lowering flea counts and protecting prairie dogs from plague. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 14% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 19% |
| Unknown | 1 | 5% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 48% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 4 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 10% |
| Arts and Humanities | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 1 | 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 12 April 2018.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Wildlife Diseases
#1,267
of 1,786 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#283,255
of 448,999 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Wildlife Diseases
#14
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,786 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 448,999 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.