Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20140436›Full record

ArticleCurrent microbiology2010

Occurrence of Vibrio parahaemolyticus and its specific phages from shrimp ponds in east coast of India.

K M Alagappan, B Deivasigamani, S T Somasundaram, S Kumaran

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Current microbiology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Isolation and Characterization of SixFrontiers in microbiology · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Saudi journal of medicine & medical sciences
    Review
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.

K M AlagappanCentre of Advanced Study in Marine Biology, Annamalai University, Parangipettai 608 502, Tamil Nadu, India. alagumicro@yahoo.co.in
B Deivasigamani
S T Somasundaram
S Kumaran

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vibrio parahaemolyticus is a natural microflora of marine and coastal water bodies and associated with mortality of larval shrimp in penaeid shrimp in ponds. Bacteriophages occur virtually in all places where their hosts exist. In this study, total distribution of V. parahaemolyticus and its phages were examined in shrimp ponds, seawater, estuary, animal surface, and tissues. Total vibrio count in sediments of two ponds was found to be 2.6 × 10(3) and 5.6 × 10(3) cfu/g. Incidence of V. parahaemolyticus in the ponds was close, while it was markedly higher in the animal surface and tissue samples. Biochemically identified eight strains of V. parahaemolyticus (V1, V3-V6, V9, V11, and V12) were taken for further infection studies with bacteriophage. Totally five bacteriophages capable of infecting V. parahaemolyticus MTCC-451 strain were isolated from all the samples. One of the isolated bacteriophage Vp1 from estuary was able to lyse all the isolated V. parahaemolyticus strains we used. Therefore, the morphology of Vp1 was estimated in TEM. Vp1 phage head measuring approximately about 50-60 nm diameter with icosahedral outline and a contractile tails of diameter 7 nm and length 100 nm and it was identified as Myoviridae. Therefore, the phages have the potential application in destroying bacterial pathogens.

Indexed as

PenaeidaeWater MicrobiologyAnimalsAquacultureBacteriophagesFood ContaminationGeologic SedimentsIndiaMicroscopy, ElectronMyoviridaeOceans and SeasSeawaterShellfishVibrio parahaemolyticus

Identifiers

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.