Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15240297›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2004

New real-time quantitative PCR procedure for quantification of bifidobacteria in human fecal samples.

Miguel Gueimonde, Satu Tölkkö, Teemu Korpimäki, Seppo Salminen

Abstract read
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 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

49 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Kestose Increases the Relative Abundance ofPolish journal of microbiology · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Effects of the intake of non-liveBioscience of microbiota, food and health · 2021
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Miguel GueimondeDepartment of Biochemistry and Food Chemistry, University of Turku, Vatselankatu 2, FIN-20014 Turku, Finland. miguel.gueimonde@utu.fi
Satu Tölkkö
Teemu Korpimäki
Seppo Salminen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The application of a real-time quantitative PCR method (5' nuclease assay), based on the use of a probe labeled at its 5' end with a stable, fluorescent lanthanide chelate, for the quantification of human fecal bifidobacteria was evaluated. The specificities of the primers and the primer-probe combination were evaluated by conventional PCR and real-time PCR, respectively. The results obtained by real-time PCR were compared with those obtained by fluorescent in situ hybridization, the current gold standard for intestinal microbiota quantification. In general, a good correlation between the two methods was observed. In order to determine the detection limit and the accuracy of the real-time PCR procedure, germfree rat feces were spiked with known amounts of bifidobacteria and analyzed by both methods. The detection limit of the method used in this study was found to be about 5 x 10(4) cells per g of feces. Both methods, real-time PCR and fluorescent in situ hybridization, led to an accurate quantification of the spiked samples with high levels of bifidobacteria, but real-time PCR was more accurate for samples with low levels. We conclude that the real-time PCR procedure described here is a specific, accurate, rapid, and easy method for the quantification of bifidobacteria in feces.

Indexed as

Colony Count, MicrobialAdultAgedAnimalsBifidobacteriumFecesHumansInfantPolymerase Chain ReactionRatsRNA, Ribosomal, 16SRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID15240297
PMCPMC444799

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.