Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25171185›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

(GTG)5 MSP-PCR fingerprinting as a technique for discrimination of wine associated yeasts?

Mauricio Ramírez-Castrillón, Sandra Denise Camargo Mendes, Mario Inostroza-Ponta, Patricia Valente

Open access · goldAbstract 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 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The Oleaginous YeastFrontiers in microbiology · 2017
    Article
  12. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Mauricio Ramírez-CastrillónCentro de Biotecnologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Campus do Vale, Porto Alegre, Brazil; Departamento de Microbiologia, Imunologia e Parasitologia, ICBS, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Sarmento Leite, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Sandra Denise Camargo MendesCentro de Biotecnologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Campus do Vale, Porto Alegre, Brazil; Departamento de Microbiologia, Imunologia e Parasitologia, ICBS, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Sarmento Leite, Porto Alegre, Brazil; Empresa de Pesquisa Agropecuária e Extensão Rural de Santa Catarina, Laboratório de Análises de Vinhos e Derivados, Estação Experimental de Videira, Campo Experimental, Videira, Brazil.
Mario Inostroza-PontaDepartamento de Ingeniería Informática, Universidad de Santiago de Chile, Santiago de Chile, Chile.
Patricia ValenteDepartamento de Microbiologia, Imunologia e Parasitologia, ICBS, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Sarmento Leite, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul · BRUniversidad de Santiago de Chile · CL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In microbiology, identification of all isolates by sequencing is still unfeasible in small research laboratories. Therefore, many yeast diversity studies follow a screening procedure consisting of clustering the yeast isolates using MSP-PCR fingerprinting, followed by identification of one or a few selected representatives of each cluster by sequencing. Although this procedure has been widely applied in the literature, it has not been properly validated. We evaluated a standardized protocol using MSP-PCR fingerprinting with the primers (GTG)5 and M13 for the discrimination of wine associated yeasts in South Brazil. Two datasets were used: yeasts isolated from bottled wines and vineyard environments. We compared the discriminatory power of both primers in a subset of 16 strains, choosing the primer (GTG)5 for further evaluation. Afterwards, we applied this technique to 245 strains, and compared the results with the identification obtained by partial sequencing of the LSU rRNA gene, considered as the gold standard. An array matrix was constructed for each dataset and used as input for clustering with two methods (hierarchical dendrograms and QAPGrid layout). For both yeast datasets, unrelated species were clustered in the same group. The sensitivity score of (GTG)5 MSP-PCR fingerprinting was high, but specificity was low. As a conclusion, the yeast diversity inferred in several previous studies may have been underestimated and some isolates were probably misidentified due to the compliance to this screening procedure.

Indexed as

Cluster AnalysisDNA FingerprintingDNA, FungalDNA PrimersGenetic VariationPhylogenyPolymerase Chain ReactionRNA, RibosomalSequence Analysis, DNASpecies SpecificityWineYeastsDNA, FungalDNA PrimersRNA, Ribosomal

Identifiers

PMID25171185
PMCPMC4149466
OpenAlexW2052923539

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.