↓ Skip to main content

Oxford University Press

Lack of Evidence for Transovarial Transmission of the Lyme Disease Spirochete Borrelia mayonii by Infected Female Ixodes scapularis (Acari: Ixodidae) Ticks

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Medical Entomology, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#13 of 3,153)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
60 news outlets
twitter
7 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Lack of Evidence for Transovarial Transmission of the Lyme Disease Spirochete Borrelia mayonii by Infected Female Ixodes scapularis (Acari: Ixodidae) Ticks
Published in
Journal of Medical Entomology, January 2018
DOI 10.1093/jme/tjx248
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicole E Breuner, Andrias Hojgaard, Lars Eisen

Abstract

The recently described Lyme disease spirochete Borrelia mayonii is associated with human illness in the Upper Midwest of the United States. Experimental laboratory studies and field observations on natural infection indicate that B. mayonii is maintained by horizontal transmission between tick vectors and vertebrate reservoirs. While maintaining a colony of Ixodes scapularis Say (Acari: Ixodidae) ticks infected with the B. mayonii type strain (MN14-1420), we had an opportunity to examine whether infected females may pass this spirochete transovarially to their offspring. We found no evidence of B. mayonii infection in subsets of larvae originating from 18 infected I. scapularis females (grand total of 810 larvae tested), or in mice exposed to larval feeding.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 23 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 22%
Researcher 4 17%
Student > Master 3 13%
Other 2 9%
Professor 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 5 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 43%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 4%
Engineering 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 467. 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 30 May 2018.
All research outputs
#51,534
of 23,907,431 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Medical Entomology
#13
of 3,153 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,362
of 446,517 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Medical Entomology
#4
of 44 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,907,431 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,153 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 446,517 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 44 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 93% of its contemporaries.