Evidence map›Paper›PMID 14711627›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2004

Rapid and specific detection of Salmonella spp. in animal feed samples by PCR after culture enrichment.

Charlotta Löfström, Rickard Knutsson, Charlotta Engdahl Axelsson, Peter Rådström

Open access · greenAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

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 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
10.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 93 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Advances in detection methods for viable Salmonella spp.: current applications and challenges.Analytical sciences : the international journal of the Japan Society for Analytical Chemistry · 2023
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Detection ofBiosensors · 2019
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Screening and DetectingFrontiers in microbiology · 2017
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Charlotta LöfströmDepartment of Applied Microbiology, Lund Institute of Technology, Lund University, SE-221 00 Lund. AnalyCen Nordic AB, SE-531 19 Lidköping, Sweden.
Rickard Knutsson
Charlotta Engdahl Axelsson
Peter Rådström
Lund University · SESjukhuset i Lidköping · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A PCR procedure has been developed for routine analysis of viable Salmonella spp. in feed samples. The objective was to develop a simple PCR-compatible enrichment procedure to enable DNA amplification without any sample pretreatment such as DNA extraction or cell lysis. PCR inhibition by 14 different feed samples and natural background flora was circumvented by the use of the DNA polymerase Tth. This DNA polymerase was found to exhibit a high level of resistance to PCR inhibitors present in these feed samples compared to DyNAzyme II, FastStart Taq, Platinum Taq, Pwo, rTth, Taq, and Tfl. The specificity of the Tth assay was confirmed by testing 101 Salmonella and 43 non-Salmonella strains isolated from feed and food samples. A sample preparation method based on culture enrichment in buffered peptone water and DNA amplification with Tth DNA polymerase was developed. The probability of detecting small numbers of salmonellae in feed, in the presence of natural background flora, was accurately determined and found to follow a logistic regression model. From this model, the probability of detecting 1 CFU per 25 g of feed in artificially contaminated soy samples was calculated and found to be 0.81. The PCR protocol was evaluated on 155 naturally contaminated feed samples and compared to an established culture-based method, NMKL-71. Eight percent of the samples were positive by PCR, compared with 3% with the conventional method. The reasons for the differences in sensitivity are discussed. Use of this method in the routine analysis of animal feed samples would improve safety in the food chain.

Indexed as

Animal FeedAnimalsBuffersColony Count, MicrobialCulture MediaDNA-Directed DNA PolymerasePolymerase Chain ReactionSalmonellaSensitivity and SpecificitySpecies SpecificityTime FactorsBuffersCulture MediaDNA-Directed DNA PolymeraseTth polymerase

Identifiers

PMID14711627
PMCPMC321250
OpenAlexW2160117612

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.