ArticleJournal of food science and technology2015
Toxinotyping and antimicrobial susceptibility of enterotoxigenic Clostridium perfringens isolates from mutton, beef and chicken meat.
Article in Journal of food science and technology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Epidemiology and diagnostic accuracy of Clostridium perfringens toxins in the intestinal contents of camels, sheep, and cattle: a cross-sectional study in Dakahlia governorate, Egypt.Tropical animal health and production · 2024Article
- Prevalence and Antibiotic Resistance Profile ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Bacteriological and molecular typing of Clostridium perfringens strains isolated in retail beef in Beijing, China.The Journal of veterinary medical science · 2021Article
- Broiler chicken carcasses and their associated abattoirs as a source of enterotoxigenicAIMS microbiology · 2018Article
- Toxinotyping and Antimicrobial Resistance ofJournal of veterinary research · 2017Article
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
A total of 300 meat samples comprising mutton, beef, and chicken meat (n = 100) collected from either local butcher shops or large meat outlets situated at various areas of Lahore City located in Punjab province of Pakistan were tested for the isolation of Clostridium perfringens. Prevalence of the organism was highest in the chicken (6 %) followed by mutton (5 %) and beef (1 %). Contamination level was high (10/150) in the samples collected from local butcher shops in comparison to the samples collected from large meat outlets (2/150). All of the raw meat samples were negative for the presence of alpha, beta and epsilon toxins of C. perfringens as detected through ELISA. Out of a total number of 12 isolates only half were capable of producing enterotoxins when cultured in trypticase glucose yeast (TGY) broth. Toxinotyping of the isolates showed that 3 were of type A while one each of the remaining three belonged to type B, C, and D. Antibiotic susceptibility testing of the toxin producing isolates revealed that C. perfringens were susceptible to chloramphenicol, ciprofloxacin, metronidazole, and ceftriaxone. All of the other drugs were relatively less effective with a least activity of amoxicillin against the isolates.
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.