Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24482682›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Sequence similarity of Clostridium difficile strains by analysis of conserved genes and genome content is reflected by their ribotype affiliation.

Hedwig Kurka, Armin Ehrenreich, Wolfgang Ludwig, Marc Monot, Maja Rupnik, Frederic Barbut, Alexander Indra, Bruno Dupuy, Wolfgang Liebl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. iScience · 2025
    Article
  2. Unique growth and morphology properties of Clade 5bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. High genetic similarity betweenFrontiers in public health · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Comparative Genomics of Clostridioides difficile.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Toxinotyping and Sequencing ofFrontiers in medicine · 2017
    Article
  15. Comparative genomic analysis ofGut pathogens · 2017
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Complete genome sequence ofGut pathogens · 2016
    Article
  19. Genome Analysis ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2016
    Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

Hedwig KurkaTechnische Universität München, Department of Microbiology, Freising, Germany.
Armin EhrenreichTechnische Universität München, Department of Microbiology, Freising, Germany.
Wolfgang LudwigTechnische Universität München, Department of Microbiology, Freising, Germany.
Marc MonotLaboratoire Pathogenèse des Bacteries Anaerobies, Institute Pasteur, Paris, France.
Maja RupnikInstitute of Public Health Maribor and University of Maribor, Faculty of Medicine and Centre of excellence Cipkebip, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Frederic BarbutNational Reference Laboratory for Clostridium difficile, Faculté de Médecine Pierre et Marie Curie and Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France.
Alexander IndraInstitute for Medical Microbiology and Hygiene, AGES - Austrian Agency for Health & Food Safety, Vienna, Austria.
Bruno DupuyLaboratoire Pathogenèse des Bacteries Anaerobies, Institute Pasteur, Paris, France.
Wolfgang LieblTechnische Universität München, Department of Microbiology, Freising, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PCR-ribotyping is a broadly used method for the classification of isolates of Clostridium difficile, an emerging intestinal pathogen, causing infections with increased disease severity and incidence in several European and North American countries. We have now carried out clustering analysis with selected genes of numerous C. difficile strains as well as gene content comparisons of their genomes in order to broaden our view of the relatedness of strains assigned to different ribotypes. We analyzed the genomic content of 48 C. difficile strains representing 21 different ribotypes. The calculation of distance matrix-based dendrograms using the neighbor joining method for 14 conserved genes (standard phylogenetic marker genes) from the genomes of the C. difficile strains demonstrated that the genes from strains with the same ribotype generally clustered together. Further, certain ribotypes always clustered together and formed ribotype groups, i.e. ribotypes 078, 033 and 126, as well as ribotypes 002 and 017, indicating their relatedness. Comparisons of the gene contents of the genomes of ribotypes that clustered according to the conserved gene analysis revealed that the number of common genes of the ribotypes belonging to each of these three ribotype groups were very similar for the 078/033/126 group (at most 69 specific genes between the different strains with the same ribotype) but less similar for the 002/017 group (86 genes difference). It appears that the ribotype is indicative not only of a specific pattern of the amplified 16S-23S rRNA intergenic spacer but also reflects specific differences in the nucleotide sequences of the conserved genes studied here. It can be anticipated that the sequence deviations of more genes of C. difficile strains are correlated with their PCR-ribotype. In conclusion, the results of this study corroborate and extend the concept of clonal C. difficile lineages, which correlate with ribotypes affiliation.

Indexed as

Bacterial ToxinsClostridioides difficileCluster AnalysisConserved SequenceDNA, BacterialDNA GyraseGenetic VariationGenome, BacterialPhenotypePhylogenyRibotypingSequence Analysis, DNASequence Homology, Nucleic AcidVirulenceBacterial ToxinsDNA, BacterialDNA Gyrase

Identifiers

PMID24482682
PMCPMC3902958

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.