ArticleFolia microbiologica2008
Characterization of Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis isolated from surface waters.
Article in Folia microbiologica, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Selection of enhanced antimicrobial activity posing lactic acid bacteria characterised by (GTG)5-PCR fingerprinting.Journal of food science and technology · 2015Article
- Lactobacillus spp. associated with early childhood caries.Folia microbiologica · 2009Article
- Expression of fungal cellulase gene in Lactococcus lactis to construct novel recombinant silage inoculants.Folia microbiologica · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A group of nine presumptive enterococci was isolated on enterococcal selective media Slanetz-Bartley agar and/or kanamycin-esculin-azide agar during a screening of Enterococcus spp. in surface waters. All strains formed a homogeneous cluster separated from all enterococcal species using rep-PCR fingerprinting with the (GTG)5 primer but they matched fingerprints revealed by Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis representatives. Further identification using extensive biotyping and automated ribotyping with EcoRI (RiboPrinter microbial characterization system) confirmed all strains as L. lactis subsp. lactis in full correspondence with the (GTG)5-PCR. We demonstrated that L. lactis subsp. lactis strains occur in different surface waters and can be confused with enterococci due to their positive growth on selective enterococcal media as well as positive results in tests commonly used for identification of the genus Enterococcus (esculin hydrolysis, acetoin and pyrrolidonyl arylamidase production, growth at 10 degrees C and in 6.5% NaCl). The (GTG)5-PCR fingerprinting was revealed as a reliable and fast method for the identification of L. lactis subsp lactis while automated ribotyping with EcoRI proved to be a good tool for intrasubspecies typing purposes.
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.