ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2002
Monitoring of Ralstonia eutropha KT1 in groundwater in an experimental bioaugmentation field by in situ PCR.
Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantitative determination of free-DNA uptake in river bacteria at the single-cell level by in situ rolling-circle amplification.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2006Article
- Visualization and enumeration of bacteria carrying a specific gene sequence by in situ rolling circle amplification.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2005Article
- Recognition of individual genes in diverse microorganisms by cycling primed in situ amplification.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2005Article
- Unique kinetic properties of phenol-degrading variovorax strains responsible for efficient trichloroethylene degradation in a chemostat enrichment culture.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2005Article
- Detection of bacteria carrying the stx2 gene by in situ loop-mediated isothermal amplification.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2003Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ralstonia eutropha KT1, which degrades trichloroethylene, was injected into the aquifer after activation with toluene, and then the number of bacteria was monitored by in situ PCR targeting the phenol hydroxylase gene and by fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) targeting 16S rRNA. Before injection of the bacterial suspension, the total concentration of bacteria in the groundwater was approximately 3 x 10(5) cells/ml and the amount of Ralstonia and bacteria carrying the phenol hydroxylase gene as a percentage of total bacterial cells was less than 0.1%. The concentration of bacteria carrying the phenol hydroxylase gene detected by in situ PCR was approximately 3 x 10(7) cells/ml 1 h after injection, and the concentration of Ralstonia detected by FISH was similar. The number of bacteria detected by in situ PCR was similar to that detected by FISH 4 days after the start of the extraction of groundwater. On and after day 7, however, the number of bacterial cells detected by FISH was less than that detected by in situ PCR.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.