ArticlePloS one2014
Molecular characterization of Clostridium botulinum isolates from foodborne outbreaks in Thailand, 2010.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Guideline
- Rapid Detection ofInternational journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Draft Genome Sequence of a Clostridium botulinum Isolate from Thailand Harboring the SubtypeMicrobiology resource announcements · 2019Article
- Variations in the Botulinum Neurotoxin Binding Domain and the Potential for Novel Therapeutics.Toxins · 2018Review
- Article
- Isolation and functional characterization of the novel Clostridium botulinum neurotoxin A8 subtype.PloS one · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThailand has had several foodborne outbreaks of botulism, one of the biggest being in 2006 when laboratory investigations identified the etiologic agent as Clostridium botulinum type A. Identification of the etiologic agent from outbreak samples is laborious using conventional microbiological methods and the neurotoxin mouse bioassay. Advances in molecular techniques have added enormous information regarding the etiology of outbreaks and characterization of isolates. We applied these methods in three outbreaks of botulism in Thailand in 2010. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsA total of 19 cases were involved (seven each in Lampang and Saraburi and five in Maehongson provinces). The first outbreak in Lampang province in April 2010 was associated with C. botulinum type F, which was detected by conventional methods. Outbreaks in Saraburi and Maehongson provinces occurred in May and December were due to C. botulinum type A1(B) and B that were identified by conventional methods and molecular techniques, respectively. The result of phylogenetic sequence analysis showed that C. botulinum type A1(B) strain Saraburi 2010 was close to strain Iwate 2007. Molecular analysis of the third outbreak in Maehongson province showed C. botulinum type B8, which was different from B1-B7 subtype. The nontoxic component genes of strain Maehongson 2010 revealed that ha33, ha17 and botR genes were close to strain Okra (B1) while ha70 and ntnh genes were close to strain 111 (B2). CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This study demonstrates the utility of molecular genotyping of C. botulinum and how it contributes to our understanding the epidemiology and variation of boNT gene. Thus, the recent botulism outbreaks in Thailand were induced by various C. botulinum types.
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.