Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21527017›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2011

Transcriptomic analysis of milk somatic cells in mastitis resistant and susceptible sheep upon challenge with Staphylococcus epidermidis and Staphylococcus aureus.

Cécile M D Bonnefont, Mehdi Toufeer, Cécile Caubet, Eliane Foulon, Christian Tasca, Marie-Rose Aurel, Dominique Bergonier, Séverine Boullier, Christèle Robert-Granié, Gilles Foucras and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 84 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Cécile M D BonnefontINRA, UR631, SAGA, F-31326 Castanet-Tolosan, France.
Mehdi Toufeer
Cécile Caubet
Eliane Foulon
Christian Tasca
Marie-Rose Aurel
Dominique Bergonier
Séverine Boullier
Christèle Robert-Granié
Gilles Foucras
Rachel Rupp
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique · MAÉcole Nationale Vétérinaire de Toulouse · FRInteraction Hôtes Agents Pathogènes · FRUniversité de Toulouse · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe existence of a genetic basis for host responses to bacterial intramammary infections has been widely documented, but the underlying mechanisms and the genes are still largely unknown. Previously, two divergent lines of sheep selected for high/low milk somatic cell scores have been shown to be respectively susceptible and resistant to intramammary infections by Staphylococcus spp. Transcriptional profiling with an 15K ovine-specific microarray of the milk somatic cells of susceptible and resistant sheep infected successively by S. epidermidis and S. aureus was performed in order to enhance our understanding of the molecular and cellular events associated with mastitis resistance.

resultsThe bacteriological titre was lower in the resistant than in the susceptible animals in the 48 hours following inoculation, although milk somatic cell concentration was similar. Gene expression was analysed in milk somatic cells, mainly represented by neutrophils, collected 12 hours post-challenge. A high number of differentially expressed genes between the two challenges indicated that more T cells are recruited upon inoculation by S. aureus than S. epidermidis. A total of 52 genes were significantly differentially expressed between the resistant and susceptible animals. Further Gene Ontology analysis indicated that differentially expressed genes were associated with immune and inflammatory responses, leukocyte adhesion, cell migration, and signal transduction. Close biological relationships could be established between most genes using gene network analysis. Furthermore, gene expression suggests that the cell turn-over, as a consequence of apoptosis/granulopoiesis, may be enhanced in the resistant line when compared to the susceptible line.

conclusionsGene profiling in resistant and susceptible lines has provided good candidates for mapping the biological pathways and genes underlying genetically determined resistance and susceptibility towards Staphylococcus infections, and opens new fields for further investigation.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingImmunity, InnateStaphylococcus aureusStaphylococcus epidermidisAnimalsBacterial LoadCell CountCluster AnalysisFemaleGene Regulatory NetworksLeukocytesMastitisMetabolic Networks and PathwaysMilkOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisPrincipal Component Analysis

Identifiers

PMID21527017
PMCPMC3096985
OpenAlexW2120738511

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.