My paper with Munir about H5N8 having a single origin has 5 cites. Verhagen et al. Science paper - How a virus travels the world has 17 cites but amazingly the paper with the riveting title Novel Eurasian highly pathogenic avian influenza A H5 viruses in wild birds Washington USA 2014 has 24 cites.
Looking at Google Scholar for all of the H5N8 citations you have:
Characterization of three H5N5 and one H5N8 highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses in China Veterinary Microbiology 60.
Pathobiological features of a novel, highly pathogenic avian influenza A (H5N8) virus Emerging Microbes and Infections 27
A novel highly pathogenic H5N8 avian influenza virus isolated from a wild duck in China Influenza and Other Respiratory Diseases 22
Characterization of an H5N8 influenza A virus isolated from chickens during an outbreak of severe avian influenza in Japan in April 2014 Archives of Virology (closed access) 6
So my new research questions are:
How can there be this amount of publication on 120 viral sequences?
How can there be these amounts of citations in less than 18 months?
How can peer review not reject so many papers which cover virtually identical ground?
Why does my paper languish behind all of the others?
This to me looks like classic clique behaviour and also the rich get richer. It will be interesting to construct the network of citations and return citations.