Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24948952›Full record

ArticleBrazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology]2014

Molecular detection of virulence factors among food and clinical Enterococcus faecalis strains in South Brazil.

A W Medeiros, R I Pereira, D V Oliveira, P D Martins, P A d'Azevedo, S Van der Sand, J Frazzon, A P G Frazzon

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology], 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing 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

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Cross-Sector Antimicrobial Resistance and Virulence inAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. The gut microbiota of wild birds undergoing rehabilitation as a reservoir of multidrug-resistant enterococci in a metropolitan area in Brazil.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Prevalence and Virulence Characteristics ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Microorganisms · 2021
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Genomic Analysis ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

8 authors.

A W MedeirosPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Microbiologia Agrícola e do Ambiente Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Porto AlegreRS Brazil.
R I PereiraInstituto de Ciências Básicas da Saúde Departamento de Microbiologia Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Porto AlegreRS Brazil.
D V OliveiraPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Microbiologia Agrícola e do Ambiente Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Porto AlegreRS Brazil.
P D MartinsPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Microbiologia Agrícola e do Ambiente Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Porto AlegreRS Brazil.
P A d'AzevedoDepartamento de Ciências Básicas da Saúde Universidade Federal de Ciências da Saúde de Porto Alegre Porto AlegreRS Brazil.
S Van der SandPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Microbiologia Agrícola e do Ambiente Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Porto AlegreRS Brazil.
J FrazzonInstituto de Ciência e Tecnologia de Alimentos Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Porto AlegreRS Brazil.
A P G FrazzonPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Microbiologia Agrícola e do Ambiente Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul Porto AlegreRS Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present report aimed to perform a molecular epidemiological survey by investigating the presence of virulence factors in E. faecalis isolated from different human clinical (n = 57) and food samples (n = 55) in Porto Alegre, Brazil, collected from 2006 to 2009. In addition, the ability to form biofilm in vitro on polystyrene and the β-haemolytic and gelatinase activities were determined. Clinical strains presented a higher prevalence of aggregation substance (agg), enterococcal surface protein (esp) and cytolysin (cylA) genes when compared with food isolates. The esp gene was found only in clinical strains. On the other hand, the gelatinase (gelE) and adherence factor (ace) genes had similar prevalence among the strains, showing the widespread occurrence of these virulence factors among food and clinical E. faecalis strains in South Brazil. More than three virulence factor genes were detected in 77.2% and 18.2% of clinical and food strains, respectively. Gelatinase and β-haemolysin activities were not associated with the presence of gelE and cylA genes. The ability to produce biofilm was detected in 100% of clinical and 94.6% of food isolates, and clinical strains were more able to form biofilm than the food isolates (Student's t-test, p < 0.01). Results from the statistical analysis showed significant associations between strong biofilm formation and ace (p = 0.015) and gelE (p = 0.007) genes in clinical strains. In conclusion, our data indicate that E. faecalis strains isolated from clinical and food samples possess distinctive patterns of virulence factors, with a larger number of genes that encode virulence factors detected in clinical strains.

Indexed as

Food MicrobiologyBacterial ProteinsBiofilmsBrazilEnterococcus faecalisGelatinasesGram-Positive Bacterial InfectionsHemolysisHumansVirulence FactorsBacterial ProteinsGelatinasesVirulence Factorsbiofilm formationclinical enterococcifood enterococcivirulence determinants

Identifiers

PMID24948952
PMCPMC4059318

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.