Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23951312›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

Free-living turtles are a reservoir for Salmonella but not for Campylobacter.

Clara Marin, Sofia Ingresa-Capaccioni, Sara González-Bodi, Francisco Marco-Jiménez, Santiago Vega

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. One Health Approach: Invasive California Kingsnake (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Article
  11. A Systematic Review on the Role of Wildlife as Carriers and Spreaders ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Review
  12. Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Antimicrobial ResistantVeterinary sciences · 2022
    Article
  15. Serotype Diversity and Antimicrobial Resistance Profile ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2022
    Article
  16. Turtle-associated salmonellosis due toJournal of rural medicine : JRM · 2021
    Article
  17. Virulence and Antimicrobial Resistance Pattern ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Microorganisms · 2021
    Article
  20. Free-Living Aquatic Turtles as Sentinels ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2021
    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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Clara MarinInstituto de Ciencias Biomédicas. Departamento de Producción Animal, Sanidad Animal, Salud Pública Veterinaria y Ciência y Tecnología de los Alimentos, Facultad de Veterinaria, Universidad CEU-Cardenal Herrera, Alfara del Patriarca, Valencia, Spain. clara.marin@uch.ceu.es
Sofia Ingresa-Capaccioni
Sara González-Bodi
Francisco Marco-Jiménez
Santiago Vega
Universidad Cardenal Herrera CEU · ESUniversitat Politècnica de València · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Different studies have reported the prevalence of Salmonella in turtles and its role in reptile-associated salmonellosis in humans, but there is a lack of scientific literature related with the epidemiology of Campylobacter in turtles. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of Campylobacter and Salmonella in free-living native (Emys orbicularis, n=83) and exotic (Trachemysscripta elegans, n=117) turtles from 11 natural ponds in Eastern Spain. In addition, different types of samples (cloacal swabs, intestinal content and water from Turtle containers) were compared. Regardless of the turtle species, natural ponds where individuals were captured and the type of sample taken, Campylobacter was not detected. Salmonella was isolated in similar proportions in native (8.0 ± 3.1%) and exotic (15.0 ± 3.3%) turtles (p=0.189). The prevalence of Salmonella positive turtles was associated with the natural ponds where animals were captured. Captured turtles from 8 of the 11 natural ponds were positive, ranged between 3.0 ± 3.1% and 60.0 ± 11.0%. Serotyping revealed 8 different serovars among four Salmonella enterica subspecies: S. enterica subsp. enterica (n = 21), S. enterica subsp. salamae (n = 2), S. enterica subsp. diarizonae (n = 3), and S. enterica subsp. houtenae (n = 1). Two serovars were predominant: S. Thompson (n=16) and S. typhimurium (n=3). In addition, there was an effect of sample type on Salmonella detection. The highest isolation of Salmonella was obtained from intestinal content samples (12.0 ± 3.0%), while lower percentages were found for water from the containers and cloacal swabs (8.0 ± 2.5% and 3.0 ± 1.5%, respectively). Our results imply that free-living turtles are a risk factor for Salmonella transmission, but do not seem to be a reservoir for Campylobacter. We therefore rule out turtles as a risk factor for human campylobacteriosis. Nevertheless, further studies should be undertaken in other countries to confirm these results.

Indexed as

AnimalsCampylobacterCampylobacter InfectionsDisease ReservoirsHost-Pathogen InteractionsHumansSalmonellaSalmonella entericaSalmonella InfectionsSalmonella Infections, AnimalSalmonella typhimuriumSerotypingSpecies SpecificityTurtlesZoonoses

Identifiers

PMID23951312
PMCPMC3737154
OpenAlexW2026203124

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.