ArticleSpringerPlus2014
Evaluation and updating of the Medical Malacology Collection (Fiocruz-CMM) using molecular taxonomy.
Article in SpringerPlus, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond the shell: malacology in medical dermatology.Archives of dermatological research · 2024Review
- DNA barcoding as a valuable tool for delimiting mollusk species of the genusFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023Article
- A loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay for Schistosoma mansoni detection in Biomphalaria spp. from schistosomiasis-endemic areas in Minas Gerais, Brazil.Parasites & vectors · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Medical Malacology Collection (Coleção de Malacologia Médica, Fiocruz-CMM) is a depository of medically relevant mollusks, especially from the genus Biomphalaria, which includes the hosts of Schistosoma mansoni. Taxonomic studies of these snails have traditionally focused on the morphology of the reproductive system. However, determination of some species is complicated by the similarity shown by these characters. Molecular techniques have been used to try to overcome this problem. DESCRIPTION: The Fiocruz-CMM utilizes morphological and/or molecular method for species' identification. However, part of the collection has not been identified by molecular techniques and some points were unidentified. The present study employs polymerase chain reaction-based analysis of restriction fragment length polymorphisms (PCR-RFLP) to evaluate the identification of Biomphalaria in the Fiocruz-CMM, correct existing errors, assess the suitability of taxonomic synonyms, and identify unknown specimens. The results indicated that 56.7% of the mollusk specimens were correctly identified, 4.0% were wrongly identified, and 0.4% was identified under taxonomic synonyms. Additionally, the PCR-RFLP analysis identified for the first time 17.6% of the specimens in the Collection. However, 3.1% of the specimens could not be identified because the mollusk tissues were degraded, and 18.2% of the specimens were inconclusively identified, demonstrating the need for new taxonomic studies in this group.
conclusionThe data was utilized to update data of Environmental Information Reference Center (CRIA). These studies demonstrate the importance of using more than one technique in taxonomic confirmation and the good preservation of specimens' collection.
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.