Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21705550›Full record

ReviewApplied and environmental microbiology2011

Life, death, and in-between: meanings and methods in microbiology.

Hazel M Davey

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 84 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
84citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

84 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. AI-Enabled Imaging for Pathogen Detection Under Stress Conditions: A Systematic Review.Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. The roles and synthesis of inorganic polyphosphate inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Carbon isotope effects in cometabolic oxidation of halogenated organics by a methanotroph.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Where the microbes aren't.FEMS microbiology reviews · 2025
    Review
  10. Assessment of Viability of Listeria monocytogenes by Flow Cytometry.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Novel Populations ofMicroorganisms · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Rapid Detection ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article

24 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author.

Hazel M DaveyInstitute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, Wales, United Kingdom. HLR@ABER.AC.UK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Determination of microbial viability by the plate count method is routine in microbiology laboratories worldwide. However, limitations of the technique, particularly with respect to environmental microorganisms, are widely recognized. Many alternatives based upon viability staining have been proposed, and these are often combined with techniques such as image analysis and flow cytometry. The plethora of choices, however, adds to confusion when selecting a method. Commercial staining kits aim to simplify the performance of microbial viability determination but often still need adaptation to the specific organism of interest and/or the instruments available to the researcher. This review explores the meaning of microbial viability and offers guidance in the selection and interpretation of viability testing methods.

Indexed as

Microbial ViabilityBacteriaEnvironmental MicrobiologyFlow CytometryFluorescenceFluorescent DyesImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMicrobiological TechniquesSoftwareStaining and LabelingFluorescent Dyes

Identifiers

PMID21705550
PMCPMC3165249

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.