The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 |
Dual Role of Mechanisms Involved in Resistance to Predation by Protozoa and Virulence to Humans
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Microbiology, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01017 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Shuyang Sun, Parisa Noorian, Diane McDougald |
| Abstract |
Most opportunistic pathogens transit in the environment between hosts and the environment plays a significant role in the evolution of protective traits. The coincidental evolution hypothesis suggests that virulence factors arose as a response to other selective pressures rather for virulence per se. This idea is strongly supported by the elucidation of bacterial-protozoal interactions. In response to protozoan predation, bacteria have evolved various defensive mechanisms which may also function as virulence factors. In this review, we summarize the dual role of factors involved in both grazing resistance and human pathogenesis, and compare the traits using model intracellular and extracellular pathogens. Intracellular pathogens rely on active invasion, blocking of the phagosome and lysosome fusion and resistance to phagocytic digestion to successfully invade host cells. In contrast, extracellular pathogens utilize toxin secretion and biofilm formation to avoid internalization by phagocytes. The complexity and diversity of bacterial virulence factors whose evolution is driven by protozoan predation, highlights the importance of protozoa in evolution of opportunistic pathogens. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 3 | 60% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 4 | 80% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 82 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 15 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 14 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Unknown | 22 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Immunology and Microbiology | 19 | 23% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 17% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 12 | 15% |
| Environmental Science | 4 | 5% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 27 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 19. 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 03 March 2023.
All research outputs
#1,815,266
of 24,469,913 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#1,217
of 27,730 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,671
of 333,148 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#47
of 609 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,469,913 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 27,730 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 333,148 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 609 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.