ArticleThe Journal of antibiotics2012
Effect of sterilized human fecal extract on the sensitivity of Escherichia coli ATCC 25922 to enrofloxacin.
Article in The Journal of antibiotics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances in the isolation, cultivation, and identification of gut microbes.Military Medical Research · 2024Review
- In vitro test systems to determine tetracycline residue binding to human feces.Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP · 2018Article
- The rebirth of culture in microbiology through the example of culturomics to study human gut microbiota.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2015Article
- Alternative strategies for proof-of-principle studies of antibacterial agents.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2014Review
- Influence of Sterilized Human Fecal Extract on the Sensitivity of Salmonella enterica ATCC 13076 and Listeria monocytogenes ATCC 15313 to Enrofloxacin.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2013Article
- In vitro analysis of the impact of enrofloxacin residues on the human intestinal microbiota using H-NMR spectroscopy.Journal of molecular microbiology and biotechnology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The ingestion of antimicrobial residues in foods of animal origin has the potential risk of exposing colonic bacteria to small concentrations of antibiotics and inducing resistance in the colonic bacteria. To investigate whether human intestinal contents would influence resistance development in bacteria, Escherichia coli ATCC 25922 (MIC of enrofloxacin <0.03 μg ml(-1)) was exposed to 0.01 to 1 μg ml(-1) of enrofloxacin in media supplemented with glucose, sucrose, sodium acetate or sterilized human fecal extract. In the first passage, only the medium containing sterilized fecal extract supported the growth of E. coli at an enrofloxacin concentration equal to the MIC. In the second and third passages following exposure to sub-inhibitory concentrations of the drug, the bacteria in media containing sterilized fecal extract grew at 0.1 μg ml(-1) of enrofloxacin. The efflux pump inhibitors, reserpine and carbonyl cyanide-m-chlorophenylhydrazone (CCCP), increased the sensitivity of bacteria to 0.1 μg ml(-1) of enrofloxacin in the medium containing sucrose, but their effect was not observed in the medium supplemented with 2.5% sterilized fecal extract. The proportions of unsaturated and saturated fatty acids in E. coli grown in the medium with 2.5% sterilized fecal extract differed from those grown in the medium alone. Fecal extract may contain unknown factors that augment the ability of E. coli to grow in concentrations of enrofloxacin higher than MIC, both in the presence and absence of efflux pump inhibitors. This is the first study showing that fecal extract affects the level of sensitivity of E. coli to antimicrobial agents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.