Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22185193›Full record

ArticleParasites & vectors2011

Use of the checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization technique for bacteria detection in Aedes aegypti (Diptera:Culicidae) (L.).

Analiz de Oliveira Gaio, Rivea C C Rodrigues, Cássio do Nascimento, Nagila F C Secundino, Francisco J A Lemos, Paulo F P Pimenta, Nadia Monesi

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Parasites & vectors, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Insects · 2024
    Article
  2. 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

7 authors.

Analiz de Oliveira GaioLaboratório de Biotecnologia, Universidade Estadual do Norte Fluminense, Campos dos Goytacazes, RJ, Brazil.
Rivea C C Rodrigues
Cássio do Nascimento
Nagila F C Secundino
Francisco J A Lemos
Paulo F P Pimenta
Nadia Monesi

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBacteria associated with insects can have a substantial impact on the biology and life cycle of their host. The checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization technique is a semi-quantitative technique that has been previously employed in odontology to detect and quantify a variety of bacterial species in dental samples. Here we tested the applicability of the checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization technique to detect the presence of Aedes aegypti-associated bacterial species in larvae, pupae and adults of A. aegypti.

findingsUsing the checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization technique we could detect and estimate the number of four bacterial species in total DNA samples extracted from A. aegypti single whole individuals and midguts. A. aegypti associated bacterial species were also detected in the midgut of four other insect species, Lutzomyia longipalpis, Drosophila melanogaster, Bradysia hygida and Apis mellifera.

conclusionsOur results demonstrate that the checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization technique can be employed to study the microbiota composition of mosquitoes. The method has the sensitivity to detect bacteria in single individuals, as well as in a single organ, and therefore can be employed to evaluate the differences in bacterial counts amongst individuals in a given mosquito population. We suggest that the checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization technique is a straightforward technique that can be widely used for the characterization of the microbiota in mosquito populations.

Indexed as

AedesAnimalsBacteriaBeesDNA, BacterialDrosophila melanogasterEntomologyLarvaNucleic Acid HybridizationPsychodidaePupaSensitivity and SpecificityDNA, Bacterial

Identifiers

PMID22185193
PMCPMC3265427

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.