Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23442526›Full record

ArticleBMC microbiology2013

Detection limits of Legionella pneumophila in environmental samples after co-culture with Acanthamoeba polyphaga.

Lisa Conza, Simona Casati, Valeria Gaia

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC microbiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Detection ofMicroorganisms · 2018
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Lisa ConzaSwiss National Reference Centre for Legionella, Cantonal Institute of Microbiology, Via Mirasole 22a, 6500, Bellinzona, Switzerland. lisa.conza@ti.ch
Simona Casati
Valeria Gaia
Repubblica e Cantone Ticino · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe efficiency of recovery and the detection limit of Legionella after co-culture with Acanthamoeba polyphaga are not known and so far no investigations have been carried out to determine the efficiency of the recovery of Legionella spp. by co-culture and compare it with that of conventional culturing methods. This study aimed to assess the detection limits of co-culture compared to culture for Legionella pneumophila in compost and air samples. Compost and air samples were spiked with known concentrations of L. pneumophila. Direct culturing and co-culture with amoebae were used in parallel to isolate L. pneumophila and recovery standard curves for both methods were produced for each sample.

resultsThe co-culture proved to be more sensitive than the reference method, detecting 10²-10³ L. pneumophila cells in 1 g of spiked compost or 1 m³ of spiked air, as compared to 10⁵-10⁶ cells in 1 g of spiked compost and 1 m³ of spiked air.

conclusionsCo-culture with amoebae is a useful, sensitive and reliable technique to enrich L. pneumophila in environmental samples that contain only low amounts of bacterial cells.

Indexed as

Air MicrobiologySoil MicrobiologyAcanthamoebaBacteriological TechniquesCoculture TechniquesLegionella pneumophilaLimit of Detection

Identifiers

PMID23442526
PMCPMC3598970
OpenAlexW1983289122

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.