↓ Skip to main content

Bacterial Persistence

Overview of attention for book
Cover of 'Bacterial Persistence'

Table of Contents

  1. Altmetric Badge
    Book Overview
  2. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 1 Bacterial Persistence
  3. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 2 Persisters: Methods for Isolation and Identifying Contributing Factors-A Review.
  4. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 3 Bacterial Persistence
  5. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 4 Bacterial Persistence
  6. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 5 A Microplate-Based System as In Vitro Model of Biofilm Growth and Quantification.
  7. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 6 Protocol for Determination of the Persister Subpopulation in Candida Albicans Biofilms.
  8. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 7 Bacterial Persistence
  9. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 8 Bacterial Persistence
  10. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 9 Single-Cell Detection and Collection of Persister Bacteria in a Directly Accessible Femtoliter Droplet Array.
  11. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 10 A Whole-Cell-Based High-Throughput Screening Method to Identify Molecules Targeting Pseudomonas aeruginosa Persister Cells.
  12. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 11 Functional Analysis of the Role of Toxin-Antitoxin (TA) Loci in Bacterial Persistence.
  13. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 12 Experimental Evolution of Escherichia coli Persister Levels Using Cyclic Antibiotic Treatments
  14. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 13 In Vitro Models for the Study of the Intracellular Activity of Antibiotics
  15. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 14 Bacterial Persistence
  16. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 15 Bacterial Persistence
  17. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 16 Population Dynamics Analysis of Ciprofloxacin-Persistent S. Typhimurium Cells in a Mouse Model for Salmonella Diarrhea.
  18. Altmetric Badge
    Chapter 17 Bacterial Persistence
Attention for Chapter 16: Population Dynamics Analysis of Ciprofloxacin-Persistent S. Typhimurium Cells in a Mouse Model for Salmonella Diarrhea.
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
22 Mendeley
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.
Chapter title
Population Dynamics Analysis of Ciprofloxacin-Persistent S. Typhimurium Cells in a Mouse Model for Salmonella Diarrhea.
Chapter number 16
Book title
Bacterial Persistence
Published in
Methods in molecular biology, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4939-2854-5_16
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-1-4939-2853-8, 978-1-4939-2854-5
Authors

Kaiser, Patrick, Regoes, Roland R, Hardt, Wolf-Dietrich, Patrick Kaiser, Roland R. Regoes, Wolf-Dietrich Hardt, Regoes, Roland R.

Abstract

In vivo, antibiotics are often surprisingly inefficient at eliminating bacterial pathogens. In the case of ciprofloxacin therapy in a Salmonella enterica subspecies 1 serovar Typhimurium (S. Typhimurium, S. Tm) mouse infection model, this has been traced to tolerant bacterial cells surviving in lymph node monocytes (i.e., classical dendritic cells). To analyze the growth characteristics of these persisters, we have developed a population dynamics approach using mixtures of wild-type isogenic tagged strains (WITS) and a computational model. Here, we are providing a detailed description of the inoculum, the infection experiments, the computational analysis of the WITS data, and a computer simulation for assessing the quality of the growth parameters of the persistent S. Typhimurium cells. This approach is generic. It may be adapted to any organ infected and to any bacterial pathogen, provided that tools exist for generating, retrieving, and quantifying isogenic tagged strains.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 22 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 23%
Student > Master 3 14%
Student > Bachelor 1 5%
Librarian 1 5%
Other 2 9%
Unknown 4 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 14%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 9%
Environmental Science 1 5%
Other 4 18%
Unknown 4 18%
Attention Score in Context

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 17 October 2015.
All research outputs
#15,348,897
of 22,830,751 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#5,344
of 13,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#230,863
of 393,540 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#545
of 1,470 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,830,751 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,126 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 393,540 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,470 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.