Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20851969›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2010

Salmonella enterica in commercial swine feed and subsequent isolation of phenotypically and genotypically related strains from fecal samples.

Bayleyegn Molla, Allyson Sterman, Jennifer Mathews, Valeria Artuso-Ponte, Melanie Abley, William Farmer, Päivi Rajala-Schultz, W E Morgan Morrow, Wondwossen A Gebreyes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Prevalence, Antimicrobial Resistance, and Diversity ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

9 authors.

Bayleyegn MollaThe Ohio State University, College of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Veterinary Preventive Medicine, 1920 Coffey Rd., Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Allyson Sterman
Jennifer Mathews
Valeria Artuso-Ponte
Melanie Abley
William Farmer
Päivi Rajala-Schultz
W E Morgan Morrow
Wondwossen A Gebreyes

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine the occurrence and genotypic relatedness of Salmonella enterica isolates recovered from feed and fecal samples in commercial swine production units. Of 275 feed samples, Salmonella was detected in 10 feed samples that originated from 8 of 36 (22.2%) barns, with a prevalence of 3.6% (10/275 samples). In fecal samples, a prevalence of 17.2% was found at the early finishing stage (1,180/6,880 samples), with a significant reduction in prevalence (7.4%) when pigs reached market age (392/5,321 samples). Of the 280 Salmonella isolates systematically selected for further characterization, 50% of the feed isolates and 55.3% of the isolates of fecal origin showed similar phenotypes based on antimicrobial resistance patterns and serogrouping. About 44% of the isolates were multidrug resistant. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) genotyping grouped the 46 representative isolates into five genotypic clusters, of which four of the clusters consisted of genotypically related isolates recovered from feed and fecal samples. The occurrence of genotypically related and, in some cases, clonal strains, including multidrug-resistant isolates in commercially processed feed and fecal samples, suggests the high significance of commercial feed as a potential vehicle of Salmonella transmission.

Indexed as

Animal FeedAnimal HusbandryAnimalsElectrophoresis, Gel, Pulsed-FieldFecesGenotypeHousing, AnimalPhenotypeSalmonella entericaSalmonella Infections, AnimalSwine

Identifiers

PMID20851969
PMCPMC2976273

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.