ArticleFolia microbiologica2015
Detection of pathogenic clostridia in biogas plant wastes.
Article in Folia microbiologica, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pathogenic bacteria in biogas plants using cattle, swine, and poultry manure.Veterinarni medicina · 2025Article
- Across-Shift Changes in Viable Nasal Bacteria among Waste-Incineration Plant Workers-A Pilot Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Proteomics-based identification of orchid-associated bacteria colonizing theSaudi journal of biological sciences · 2021Article
- Water Sources in a Zoological Park Harbor Genetically Diverse Strains of Clostridium Perfringens Type A with Decreased Susceptibility to Metronidazole.Microbial ecology · 2016Article
- Detection of Clostridium botulinum in liquid manure and biogas plant wastes.Folia microbiologica · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As the number of biogas plants has grown rapidly in the last decade, the amount of potentially contaminated wastes with pathogenic Clostridium spp. has increased as well. This study reports the results from examining 203 biogas plant wastes (BGWs). The following Clostridium spp. with different frequencies could be isolated via a new enrichment medium (Krüne medium) and detected by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS): Clostridium perfringens (58 %) then Clostridium bifermentans (27 %), Clostridium tertium (23 %) and Clostridium butyricum (19 %), Clostridium cadaveris (15 %), Clostridium parapurificum (6 %), Clostridium glycolicum (5 %), Clostridium baratii (4 %), Clostridium sporogenes (2 %), Clostridium sordellii (1 %) and Clostridium subterminale (0.5 %). The mean most probable number (MPN) count of sulfite reducing bacteria was between 10(3) and 10(4)/mL, and the higher the MPN, the more pathogenic Clostridium spp. were present. Also, real-time PCR was used to be compared with culture method for C. perfringens, C. bifermentans, C. butyricum, C. sporogenes/Clostridium botulinum and C. sordellii. Although real-time PCR was more sensitive than the culture method, both systems improve the recovery rate but in different ways and are useful to determine pathogenic clostridia in biogas plants. In conclusion, BGWs could present a biohazard risk of clostridia for humans and animals.
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.