Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19124593›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2009

Diversity and habitat specificity of free-living protozoa in commercial poultry houses.

Julie Baré, Koen Sabbe, Jeroen Van Wichelen, Ineke van Gremberghe, Sofie D'hondt, Kurt Houf

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

6 authors.

Julie BaréDepartment of Veterinary Public Health and Food Safety, Ghent University, Salisburylaan 133, 9820 Merelbeke, Belgium.
Koen Sabbe
Jeroen Van Wichelen
Ineke van Gremberghe
Sofie D'hondt
Kurt Houf

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite stringent biosecurity measures, infections by bacterial food pathogens such as Campylobacter are a recurrent problem in industrial poultry houses. As the main transmission route remains unclear, persistence of these infections has been linked to bacterial survival and possibly multiplication within protozoan vectors. To date, however, virtually no information is available on the diversity and occurrence of free-living protozoa in these environments. Using a combination of microscopic analyses of enrichment cultures and molecular methods (denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis [DGGE]) on natural samples, we show that, despite strict hygiene management, free-living protozoa are common and widespread throughout a 6-week rearing period in both water and dry samples from commercial poultry houses. Protozoan communities were highly diverse (over 90 morphotaxa and 22 unique phylotypes from sequenced bands) and included several facultative pathogens and known bacterial vectors. Water samples were consistently more diverse than dry ones and harbored different communities, mainly dominated by flagellates. The morphology-based and molecular methods yielded markedly different results: amoebic and, to a lesser degree, ciliate diversity was seriously underestimated in the DGGE analyses, while some flagellate groups were not found in the microscopic analyses. Some recommendations for improving biosecurity measures in commercial poultry houses are suggested.

Indexed as

BiodiversityEnvironmental MicrobiologyHousing, AnimalPoultryAnimalsCluster AnalysisDNA FingerprintingDNA, ProtozoanElectrophoresis, Polyacrylamide GelEukaryotaGenotypeNucleic Acid DenaturationDNA, Protozoan

Identifiers

PMID19124593
PMCPMC2648169

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.