ArticleNature biotechnology2005
Genetically enhanced cows resist intramammary Staphylococcus aureus infection.
Article in Nature biotechnology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 95 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
95 citing papers in PubMed, 341 citations in OpenAlex.
- Oral administration of Lactobacillus strains isolated from breast milk as an alternative for the treatment of infectious mastitis during lactation.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2008Trial
- Safe and Stable Germline Transmission of MSTN Mutations in Cattle.Animal genetics · 2026Article
- Carbene formation as a mechanism for efficient intracellular uptake of cationic antimicrobial carbon acid polymers.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Cas9-expressing cattle using the PiggyBac transposon all-in-one system.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Current and future uses of genetic improvement technologies in livestock breeding programs.Animal frontiers : the review magazine of animal agriculture · 2025Article
- A comparative guide to expression systems for phage lysin production.Essays in biochemistry · 2024Review
- Immunotherapy in mastitis: state of knowledge, research gaps and way forward.The veterinary quarterly · 2024Review
- Outlook on genome editing application to cattle.Journal of veterinary science · 2024Review
- Current status and future of gene engineering in livestock.BMB reports · 2024Review
- Global regulatory policies for animal biotechnology: overview, opportunities and challenges.Frontiers in genome editing · 2024Review
- Livestock embryonic stem cells for reproductive biotechniques and genetic improvement.Animal reproduction · 2024Article
- Genome Editing and Protein Energy Malnutrition.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2023Article
- Evaluation of protein production in rice seedlings under dark conditions.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Construction of a Porcine Skeletal Muscle-Specific Promoter by Inducing the Seed Region of miR-208a.Molecular biotechnology · 2022Article
- An Introduction to Bacterial Biofilms and Their Proteases, and Their Roles in Host Infection and Immune Evasion.Biomolecules · 2022Review
- Cows as Bioreactors for the Production of Nutritionally and Biomedically Significant Proteins.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2022Article
- Secretion of IFN-γ by Transgenic Mammary Epithelial CellsFrontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
- CRISPR/Cas9-mediated knock-in strategy at the Rosa26 locus in cattle fetal fibroblasts.PloS one · 2022Article
- Effect of Two Different Drug-ResistantFrontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
- Physiological impact of the environment on the welfare of transgenic goats raised in a tropical climate.International journal of biometeorology · 2021Article
35 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mastitis, the most consequential disease in dairy cattle, costs the US dairy industry billions of dollars annually. To test the feasibility of protecting animals through genetic engineering, transgenic cows secreting lysostaphin at concentrations ranging from 0.9 to 14 micrograms/ml [corrected] in their milk were produced. In vitro assays demonstrated the milk's ability to kill Staphylococcus aureus. Intramammary infusions of S. aureus were administered to three transgenic and ten nontransgenic cows. Increases in milk somatic cells, elevated body temperatures and induced acute phase proteins, each indicative of infection, were observed in all of the nontransgenic cows but in none of the transgenic animals. Protection against S. aureus mastitis appears to be achievable with as little as 3 micrograms/ml [corrected] of lysostaphin in milk. Our results indicate that genetic engineering can provide a viable tool for enhancing resistance to disease and improve the well-being of livestock.
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.