ArticlePloS one2012
Transforming microbial genotyping: a robotic pipeline for genotyping bacterial strains.
Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genomic population structure associated with repeated escape of Salmonella enterica ATCC14028s from the laboratory into nature.PLoS genetics · 2021Article
- The EnteroBase user's guide, with case studies onGenome research · 2020Article
- Genomic diversity ofWellcome open research · 2020Article
- WGS based study of the population structure of Salmonella enterica serovar Infantis.BMC genomics · 2019Article
- A genomic overview of the population structure of Salmonella.PLoS genetics · 2018Review
- Characterization of InvasiveThe American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2018Article
- Clinical microbiology informatics.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2014Review
- Automated extraction of typing information for bacterial pathogens from whole genome sequence data: Neisseria meningitidis as an exemplar.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microbial genotyping increasingly deals with large numbers of samples, and data are commonly evaluated by unstructured approaches, such as spread-sheets. The efficiency, reliability and throughput of genotyping would benefit from the automation of manual manipulations within the context of sophisticated data storage. We developed a medium- throughput genotyping pipeline for MultiLocus Sequence Typing (MLST) of bacterial pathogens. This pipeline was implemented through a combination of four automated liquid handling systems, a Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS) consisting of a variety of dedicated commercial operating systems and programs, including a Sample Management System, plus numerous Python scripts. All tubes and microwell racks were bar-coded and their locations and status were recorded in the LIMS. We also created a hierarchical set of items that could be used to represent bacterial species, their products and experiments. The LIMS allowed reliable, semi-automated, traceable bacterial genotyping from initial single colony isolation and sub-cultivation through DNA extraction and normalization to PCRs, sequencing and MLST sequence trace evaluation. We also describe robotic sequencing to facilitate cherrypicking of sequence dropouts. This pipeline is user-friendly, with a throughput of 96 strains within 10 working days at a total cost of < €25 per strain. Since developing this pipeline, >200,000 items were processed by two to three people. Our sophisticated automated pipeline can be implemented by a small microbiology group without extensive external support, and provides a general framework for semi-automated bacterial genotyping of large numbers of samples at low cost.
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.