ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2004
Identification of distinct Campylobacter lari genogroups by amplified fragment length polymorphism and protein electrophoretic profiles.
Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Isolation of Campylobacter spp. from Three Species of Antarctic Penguins in Different Geographic Locations.EcoHealth · 2017Article
- Comparative genomics of the Campylobacter lari group.Genome biology and evolution · 2014Article
- Differentiation of Campylobacter coli, Campylobacter jejuni, Campylobacter lari, and Campylobacter upsaliensis by a multiplex PCR developed from the nucleotide sequence of the lipid A gene lpxA.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2004Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Campylobacter lari is a phenotypically and genotypically diverse species that comprises the classical nalidixic acid-resistant thermophilic campylobacters (NARTC) and the biochemical C. lari variants, including the urease-positive campylobacters (UPTC), the nalidixic acid-susceptible campylobacters (NASC), and the urease-producing nalidixic acid-susceptible campylobacters. To study the taxonomic and epidemiological relationships among strains of the C. lari variants, amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) profiling and whole-cell protein profile analysis were performed with 55 C. lari strains. Great genetic heterogeneity in AFLP and protein profiles was observed. Numerical analysis of AFLP profiles and of partial protein profiles allowed discrimination of four distinct genogroups. AFLP cluster I included nearly homogeneous patterns for C. lari NARTC strains (genogroup I). UPTC strains together with non-urease-producing NASC strains produced highly diverse patterns and were placed in genogroup II. The genogroup III strains had the NASC phenotype and produced more homogeneous patterns. Finally, genogroup IV strains had the classical NARTC phenotype and produced AFLP patterns that were very distinct from those of other genogroups. One UPTC strain had aberrant patterns and clustered separately, which may indicate that there is an additional genogroup. Preliminary DNA-DNA hybridization experiments suggested that genogroups I and III represent a single genomic species and that genogroup IV represents a distinct species. The detection of moderate levels of DNA-DNA hybridization between a genogroup II reference strain and genogroup I and III reference strains highlights the need for further DNA-DNA hybridization experiments to clarify the taxonomic status of the former group. No correlation of genogroups with different sources of strains was identified. These data show that UPTC strains are genetically diverse and distinct from NARTC strains. In addition, they indicate that the classical NARTC phenotype encompasses at least two genogroups.
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.