ArticleFolia microbiologica2015
Evaluation of biochemical and molecular methods for Lactobacillus reuteri strains differentiation.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Metabarcoding analysis of the microbiota in flocks naturally infected byOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Article
- Molecular characterization of microbial contaminants isolated from Umbilical Cord Blood Units for transplant.The Brazilian journal of infectious diseases : an official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious DiseasesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several biochemical and molecular methods were used for discrimination of four Lactobacillus reuteri strains isolated from goatling and lamb stomach mucosa. Internal transcribed spacer (ITS)-PCR method and protein analysis by SDS-PAGE and MALDI-TOF showed to be suitable for strain discrimination whereas ITS-PCR/RFLP and enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus (ERIC)-PCR were not strain specific. The used methods differentiated tested strains into distinct groups; however, the location of strains in groups varied. Consistency in results was observed in the case of L. reuteri E and L. reuteri KO4m that were clustered into the same groups using all techniques, except of MALDI-TOF MS. The last one grouped goatling strains and lamb isolate into separate clusters. All investigated methods, except of ITS-PCR/RFLP and ERIC-PCR, were assessed as appropriate for distinguishing of L. reuteri strains.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25300353What 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.