Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26172151›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Population Genetics and Antimicrobial Susceptibility of Canine Campylobacter Isolates Collected before and after a Raw Feeding Experiment.

Satu Olkkola, Sara Kovanen, Johanna Roine, Marja-Liisa Hänninen, Anna Hielm-Björkman, Rauni Kivistö

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Whole genome sequencing confirms source of pathogens associated with bacterial foodborne illness in pets fed raw pet food.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2019
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Raw Meat-Based Diets in Dogs and Cats.Veterinary sciences · 2017
    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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Satu OlkkolaDepartment of Food Hygiene and Environmental Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Sara KovanenDepartment of Food Hygiene and Environmental Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Johanna RoineDepartment of Equine and Small Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Marja-Liisa HänninenDepartment of Food Hygiene and Environmental Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Anna Hielm-BjörkmanDepartment of Equine and Small Animal Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Rauni KivistöDepartment of Food Hygiene and Environmental Health, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
University of Helsinki · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, increasing numbers of consumers have become interested in feeding raw food for their pet dogs as opposed to commercial dry food, in the belief of health advantages. However, raw meat and internal organs, possibly contaminated by pathogens such as Campylobacter spp., may pose a risk of transmission of zoonoses to the pet owners. Campylobacter jejuni is the leading cause of bacterial gastroenteritis in humans but C. upsaliensis has also been associated with human disease. In this study we investigated the effect of different feeding strategies on the prevalence of Campylobacter spp. in Finnish dogs. We further characterized the isolates using multilocus sequence typing (MLST), whole-genome (wg) MLST and antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Dogs were sampled before and after a feeding period consisting of commercial raw feed or dry pellet feed. Altogether 56% (20/36) of the dogs yielded at least one Campylobacter-positive fecal sample. C. upsaliensis was the major species detected from 39% of the dogs before and 30% after the feeding period. Two C. jejuni isolates were recovered, both from raw-fed dogs after the dietary regimen. The isolates represented the same genotype (ST-1326), suggesting a common infection source. However, no statistically significant correlation was found between the feeding strategies and Campylobacter spp. carriage. The global genealogy of MLST types of dog and human C. upsaliensis isolates revealed weakly clonal population structure as most STs were widely dispersed. Major antimicrobial resistance among C. upsaliensis isolates was against streptomycin (STR MIC > 4 mg/l). Apart from that, all isolates were highly susceptible against the antimicrobials tested. Mutations were found in the genes rpsL or rpsL and rsmG in streptomycin resistant isolates. In conclusion, increasing trend to feed dogs with raw meat warrants more studies to evaluate the risk associated with raw feeding of pets in transmission of zoonoses to humans.

Indexed as

Food MicrobiologyAnimal FeedAnimalsCampylobacterCampylobacter InfectionsCampylobacter jejuniCampylobacter upsaliensisDog DiseasesDogsDrug Resistance, BacterialFinlandGenes, BacterialGenetics, PopulationGenotypeHumansMicrobial Sensitivity Tests

Identifiers

PMID26172151
PMCPMC4501809
OpenAlexW886899210

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.