Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25841018›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2015

Evaluation of Lactococcus lactis Isolates from Nondairy Sources with Potential Dairy Applications Reveals Extensive Phenotype-Genotype Disparity and Implications for a Revised Species.

Daniel Cavanagh, Aidan Casey, Eric Altermann, Paul D Cotter, Gerald F Fitzgerald, Olivia McAuliffe

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Open pangenome ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Technological properties of Lactococcus lactis subsp. lactis bv. diacetylactis obtained from dairy and non-dairy niches.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Comparative Genome Analysis ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2019
    Article
  15. TheFrontiers in microbiology · 2019
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Adaptive Evolution of IndustrialFrontiers in microbiology · 2018
    Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Daniel CavanaghTeagasc Food Research Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, County Cork, Ireland Department of Microbiology, University College Cork, County Cork, Ireland.
Aidan CaseyTeagasc Food Research Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, County Cork, Ireland Department of Biological Sciences, Cork Institute of Technology, Bishopstown, Cork, Ireland.
Eric AltermannAnimal Nutrition and Health, AgResearch Ltd., Palmerston North, New Zealand.
Paul D CotterTeagasc Food Research Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, County Cork, Ireland.
Gerald F FitzgeraldDepartment of Microbiology, University College Cork, County Cork, Ireland.
Olivia McAuliffeTeagasc Food Research Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, County Cork, Ireland olivia.mcauliffe@teagasc.ie.
Teagasc - The Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority · IEAgResearch · NZMunster Technological University · IEUniversity College Cork · IE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lactococcus lactis is predominantly associated with dairy fermentations, but evidence suggests that the domesticated organism originated from a plant niche. L. lactis possesses an unusual taxonomic structure whereby strain phenotypes and genotypes often do not correlate, which in turn has led to confusion in L. lactis classification. A bank of L. lactis strains was isolated from various nondairy niches (grass, vegetables, and bovine rumen) and was further characterized on the basis of key technological traits, including growth in milk and key enzyme activities. Phenotypic analysis revealed all strains from nondairy sources to possess an L. lactis subsp. lactis phenotype (lactis phenotype); however, seven of these strains possessed an L. lactis subsp. cremoris genotype (cremoris genotype), determined by two separate PCR assays. Multilocus sequence typing (MLST) showed that strains with lactis and cremoris genotypes clustered together regardless of habitat, but it highlighted the increased diversity that exists among "wild" strains. Calculation of average nucleotide identity (ANI) and tetranucleotide frequency correlation coefficients (TETRA), using the JSpecies software tool, revealed that L. lactis subsp. cremoris and L. lactis subsp. lactis differ in ANI values by ∼14%, below the threshold set for species circumscription. Further analysis of strain TIFN3 and strains from nonindustrial backgrounds revealed TETRA values of <0.99 in addition to ANI values of <95%, implicating that these two groups are separate species. These findings suggest the requirement for a revision of L. lactis taxonomy.

Indexed as

Genetic VariationAnimalsCattleGenome, BacterialGenotypeLactococcus lactisMilkMolecular Sequence DataMultilocus Sequence TypingPhenotypePoaceaePolymerase Chain ReactionRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSequence Analysis, DNAVegetablesRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID25841018
PMCPMC4524136
OpenAlexW1952156604

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.