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 |
Repellent and Lethal Activities of Extracts From Fruits of Chinaberry (Melia azedarach L., Meliaceae) Against Triatoma infestans
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Veterinary Science, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fvets.2018.00158 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Martín Dadé, Pedro Zeinsteger, Facundo Bozzolo, Nora Mestorino |
| Abstract |
Triatoma infestans is the principal vector of Trypanosoma cruzi, parasite responsible of Chagas's Disease transmission in Argentina. Pyrethroids have become common pesticides for the control of T. infestans but increasing resistance encourages the search of new alternatives and the use of natural products for biological control arises as a new strategy. Melia azedarach L. is originated from the Himalaya's region and several compounds are part of its rich phytochemistry. Folk medicine of the plant is due to its repellent and insecticidal activities. Aims of this work were to evaluate the repellent activity of methanolic and acetonic extracts from fruits of M. azedarach by means of the area preference method of fifth and first nymph stages as well as to test the acute lethal effect of the more repellent extract by means of direct application on cuticle on both stages. For repellence, qualitative filter papers were divided into two halves, one treated with methanolic (ME) or acetonic (AC) extract and the other without treatment. Controls were impregnated half with methanol or acetone and half without the solvents. One nymph was located in each Petri or well and repellence percentage was determined. For the lethal effect, fasted and fed to repletion 5th stage nymphs were topically administered with different concentrations of AC and deaths were registered after 24, 48, 72, 96, and 120 h. Phytochemical analysis of extracts was performed as well. AC demonstrated high repellent activity (100%, both stages), whereas ME extract activity was slight (10-21%). AC extract was selected for lethal assays due to early repellent activity. Fed to repletion nymphs were more sensitive to the lethal activity of the extract when compared to fasted nymphs (LD50: 11.5 vs. 23.1 μg/insect, respectively). Phytochemistry assays of extracts showed a higher concentration of flavonoids, alkaloids and triterpenes for AC. Considering these results, next assays will include the test of Melia azedarach extract on T. infestans that are resistant to pyrethroids for a possible synergism between AC and the pesticides. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 50% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 40 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 20% |
| Researcher | 5 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 5% |
| Professor | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 17 | 43% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 12 | 30% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 5% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 18 | 45% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 20 October 2018.
All research outputs
#14,136,687
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#2,103
of 6,392 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,595
of 330,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#49
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,392 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% 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 330,319 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.