ArticleBMC microbiology2009
Biofilm formation by Mycobacterium avium isolates originating from humans, swine and birds.
Article in BMC microbiology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding recurrence inJournal of clinical microbiology · 2026Review
- Mycobacteria develop biofilms on airway epithelial cells and promote mucosal barrier disruption.iScience · 2024Article
- Biofilm Development byAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Contraction and expansion dynamics: deciphering genomic underpinnings of growth rate and pathogenicity inFrontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Non-Tuberculous Mycobacteria: Molecular and Physiological Bases of Virulence and Adaptation to Ecological Niches.Microorganisms · 2020Review
- The extracellular matrix of mycobacterial biofilms: could we shorten the treatment of mycobacterial infections?Microbial cell (Graz, Austria) · 2019Review
- Relationship Between Quorum Sensing and Secretion Systems.Frontiers in microbiology · 2019Review
- Isolation, Identification, and Characterization of a New Highly Pathogenic Field Isolate ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2017Article
- General Overview on Nontuberculous Mycobacteria, Biofilms, and Human Infection.Journal of pathogens · 2015Review
- Disruption of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis-specific genes impairs in vivo fitness.BMC genomics · 2014Article
- Intracellular growth of Mycobacterium avium subspecies and global transcriptional responses in human macrophages after infection.BMC genomics · 2014Article
- Biofilm formation by Mycobacterium bovis: influence of surface kind and temperatures of sanitizer treatments on biofilm control.BioMed research international · 2014Article
- A comparative study of Mycobacterium avium subsp. avium and Mycobacterium avium subsp. hominissuis in experimentally infected pigs.BMC veterinary research · 2012Article
- Outbreak of avian mycobacteriosis in flocks of domestic pigeons: An epidemiological approach.Iranian journal of microbiology · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMycobacterium avium includes the subspecies avium, silvaticum, paratuberculosis and hominissuis, and M. avium subspecies has been isolated from various environments all over the world including from biofilms in water distribution systems. The aim of this study was to examine isolates of M. avium subsp. avium and M. avium subsp. hominissuis of different origin for biofilm formation and to look for correlations between biofilm formation and RFLP-types, and to standardise the method to test for biofilm formation. In order to determine the best screening method, a panel of 14 isolates of M. avium subsp. avium and M. avium subsp. hominissuis, were tested for their ability to form biofilm in microtiter plates under different conditions. Subsequently, 83 additional isolates from humans, swine and birds were tested for biofilm formation. The isolates were tested for the presence of selected genes involved in the synthesis of glycopeptidolipids (GPLs) in the cell wall of M. avium, which is believed to be important for biofilm formation. Colony morphology and hsp65 sequvar were also determined.
resultsNine isolates from swine produced biofilm. There was a significant higher frequency of porcine isolates forming biofilm compared to human isolates. All isolates were previously characterised by IS1311- and IS1245-RFLP typing. The ability to form biofilm did not correlate with the RFLP-type, hsp65 sequevar, colony morphology or the presence of gene sequences related to GPL synthesis.
conclusionThe observed differences in biofilm forming abilities between porcine and human isolates raises questions regarding the importance of biofilm formation for infectious potential. The optimised method worked well for screening of multiple isolates.
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.