ArticleCytotechnology2016
Effect of different feed ingredients and additives on IPEC-J2 cells challenged with an enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli strain.
Article in Cytotechnology, 2016. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Inhibition of Enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli adhesion via aptamers prevents infection in IPEC-J2 cells.BMC microbiology · 2025Article
- Feeding aAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024Article
- Porcine and Chicken Intestinal Epithelial Cell Models for Screening Phytogenic Feed Additives-Chances and Limitations in Use as Alternatives to Feeding Trials.Microorganisms · 2022Review
- Article
- Co-infection with porcine bocavirus and porcine circovirus 2 affects inflammatory cytokine production and tight junctions of IPEC-J2 cells.Virus genes · 2018Article
- Effects of medium-chain fatty acids on the structure and immune response of IPEC-J2 cells.Cytotechnology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The intestinal porcine epithelial cell line IPEC-J2 was used as an in vitro model to assess effects of additives on the adhesion and cell toxic effects of a F4-positive (ETEC) and a F4-negative Escherichia coli (DSM 2840) strain. Bacterial adhesion was examined using flow cytometry in IPEC-J2 cells infected with bacteria stained with 5,6-carboxymethyl fluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester. Measurement of transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER) was performed to characterize the impact on IPEC-J2 monolayer integrity. The feed additives were prepared as aqueous extract and tested in different dilutions and incubation times. The F4-positive ETEC strain had a high adhesion to IPEC-J2 cells and reduced TEER shortly after the in vitro infection. The nonpathogenic E. coli strain DSM 2840 showed only low adhesion capacity and no TEER impairment. Infection with ETEC with added test extracts showed a reduction of bacterial adhesion to IPEC-J2 cells by an autolyzed yeast product (p < 0.05). Bovine colostrum, an additive containing thyme extract and an organic acid mix did not interfere with the ETEC adherence. The TEER decrease of the IPEC-J2 monolayer after ETEC infection was not affected by the added substances. In conclusion, interference with epithelial adhesion might be a protective mechanism of the tested yeast extract, indicating that the cell culture model might be suitable as screening tool to complement in vivo challenge trials with piglets.
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.