ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2013
Mycobacterium gilvum illustrates size-correlated relationships between mycobacteria and Acanthamoeba polyphaga.
Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Detection of Free-Living Amoebae and Their Intracellular Bacteria in Borehole Water before and after a Ceramic Pot Filter Point-of-Use Intervention in Rural Communities in South Africa.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- The Ecology and Evolution of Amoeba-Bacterium Interactions.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2021Review
- Marine Bacteria Display Different Escape Mechanisms When Facing Their Protozoan Predators.Microorganisms · 2020Article
- Co-culture models illustrate the digestion of Gemmata spp. by phagocytes.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Potential role of bacteria packaging by protozoa in the persistence and transmission of pathogenic bacteria.Frontiers in microbiology · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mycobacteria are isolated from soil and water environments, where free-living amoebae live. Free-living amoebae are bactericidal, yet some rapidly growing mycobacteria are amoeba-resistant organisms that survive in the amoebal trophozoites and cysts. Such a capacity has not been studied for the environmental rapidly growing organism Mycobacterium gilvum. We investigated the ability of M. gilvum to survive in the trophozoites of Acanthamoeba polyphaga strain Linc-AP1 by using optical and electron microscopy and culture-based microbial enumerations in the presence of negative controls. We observed that 29% of A. polyphaga cells were infected by M. gilvum mycobacteria by 6 h postinfection. Surviving M. gilvum mycobacteria did not multiply and did not kill the amoebal trophozoites during a 5-day coculture. Extensive electron microscopy observations indicated that M. gilvum measured 1.4 ± 0.5 μm and failed to find M. gilvum organisms in the amoebal cysts. Further experimental study of two other rapidly growing mycobacteria, Mycobacterium rhodesiae and Mycobacterium thermoresistibile, indicated that both measured <2 μm and exhibited the same amoeba-mycobacterium relationships as M. gilvum. In general, we observed that mycobacteria measuring <2 μm do not significantly grow within and do not kill amoebal trophozoites, in contrast to mycobacteria measuring >2 μm (P < 0.05). The mechanisms underlying such an observation remain to be determined.
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.