ArticleParasitology research2016
Quantitative analysis of Cryptosporidium growth in in vitro culture--the impact of parasite density on the success of infection.
Article in Parasitology research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Organoids and Bioengineered Intestinal Models: Potential Solutions to theMicroorganisms · 2020Review
- An easy 'one tube' method to estimate viability of Cryptosporidium oocysts using real-time qPCR.Parasitology research · 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cryptosporidium is an important waterborne pathogen for which no treatment or vaccination is available. This study set out to quantify DNA replication of Cryptosporidium parvum in vitro. Cryptosporidium DNA could be detected at up to 60 % of input level in both host-cell-free and host cell containing cultures 6 days after infection with living sporozoites, but was lost within 2 days in cultures inoculated with UV-inactivated sporozoites. Total DNA increased between days 2 and 6, evidence of successful DNA replication in both cell-free and host-cell-containing cultures. Overall however, only a small fraction (up to 5 %) of parasite DNA could be found associated with host cells or bound to plastic of the cell-free cultures, and the majority of parasite DNA was present in the cell culture medium, separable by simple decantation. After 2 days, in host-cell-containing cultures, the parasite DNA could be concentrated by slow centrifugation, suggesting that it was associated with intact parasite cells, but at 6 days, the majority could not be centrifuged and is therefore thought to have represented copies associated with dead and degraded parasites. In cell-free cultures and in larger plates, the majority of DNA was in this form. Performance of the parasite was best in small culture plates, and least in the largest plate sizes. We interpret these results as suggesting that Cryptosporidium sporozoites first bind to the host cell monolayer or to the plasticware, but then by 2 days, there has been a substantial release of parasites back into the medium. Host-cell-free cultures also supported modest replication and may have represented DNA synthesis in cells beginning merogony. The role of the host cells is unclear, as so much of the parasite DNA is released into the medium. Host cells may provide a feeder role, conditioning the medium for Cryptosporidium development.
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.