ArticleWiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)2015
Ancient pathogens in museal dry bone specimens: analysis of paleocytology and aDNA.
Article in Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bone samples investigated in this study derive from the pathologic-anatomical collection of the Natural History Museum of Vienna. In order to explore the survival of treponemes and treponemal ancient DNA in museal dry bone specimens, we analyzed three individuals known to have been infected with Treponema pallidum pallidum. No reproducible evidence of surviving pathogen's ancient DNA (aDNA) was obtained, despite the highly sensitive extraction and amplification techniques (TPP15 and arp). Additionally, decalcification fluid of bone sections was smear stained with May-Gruenwald-Giemsa. The slides were examined using direct light microscope and dark field illumination. Remnants of spirochetal structures were detectable in every smear. Our results demonstrate that aDNA is unlikely to survive, but spirochetal remains are stainable and thus detectable.
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.