ArticlePloS one2016
Escherichia coli O104 in Feedlot Cattle Feces: Prevalence, Isolation and Characterization.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- In-Feed vs. In-Water Chlortetracycline Administration on the Fecal Prevalence of Virulence Genes and Pathotypes ofMicroorganisms · 2025Article
- Multidrug-Resistant VirulentInternational journal of microbiology · 2025Article
- Phenotypic and genotypic characterization ofHeliyon · 2024Article
- Identification, Shiga toxin subtypes and prevalence of minor serogroups of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli in feedlot cattle feces.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Shiga Toxin-Producing and Enteroaggregative Escherichia coli in Animal, Foods, and Humans: Pathogenicity Mechanisms, Detection Methods, and Epidemiology.Current microbiology · 2020Review
- Multiplex PCR Assays for the Detection of One Hundred and Thirty Seven Serogroups of Shiga Toxin-ProducingFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2020Article
- Variability in CharacterizingMicroorganisms · 2018Article
- Article
- Genetic Analysis of Virulence Potential ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2018Article
- Draft Genome Sequences ofGenome announcements · 2017Article
- Shiga Toxin Subtypes of Non-O157Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2017Article
- Experimental Infection of Calves with Escherichia coli O104:H4 outbreak strain.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Development of 11-Plex MOL-PCR Assay for the Rapid Screening of Samples for Shiga Toxin-Producing Escherichia coli.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Escherichia coli O104:H4, an hybrid pathotype of Shiga toxigenic and enteroaggregative E. coli, involved in a major foodborne outbreak in Germany in 2011, has not been detected in cattle feces. Serogroup O104 with H type other than H4 has been reported to cause human illnesses, but their prevalence and characteristics in cattle have not been reported. Our objectives were to determine the prevalence of E. coli O104 in feces of feedlot cattle, by culture and PCR detection methods, and characterize the isolated strains. Rectal fecal samples from a total of 757 cattle originating from 29 feedlots were collected at a Midwest commercial slaughter plant. Fecal samples, enriched in E. coli broth, were subjected to culture and PCR methods of detection. The culture method involved immunomagnetic separation with O104-specific beads and plating on a selective chromogenic medium, followed by serogroup confirmation of pooled colonies by PCR. If pooled colonies were positive for the wzxO104 gene, then colonies were tested individually to identify wzxO104-positive serogroup and associated genes of the hybrid strains. Extracted DNA from feces were also tested by a multiplex PCR to detect wzxO104-positive serogroup and associated major genes of the O104 hybrid pathotype. Because wzxO104 has been shown to be present in E. coli O8/O9/O9a, wzxO104-positive isolates and extracted DNA from fecal samples were also tested by a PCR targeting wbdDO8/O9/O9a, a gene specific for E. coli O8/O9/O9a serogroups. Model-adjusted prevalence estimates of E. coli O104 (positive for wzxO104 and negative for wbdDO8/O9/O9a) at the feedlot level were 5.7% and 21.2%, and at the sample level were 0.5% and 25.9% by culture and PCR, respectively. The McNemar's test indicated that there was a significant difference (P < 0.01) between the proportions of samples that tested positive for wzxO104 and samples that were positive for wzxO104, but negative for wbdDO8/O9/O9a by PCR and culture methods. A total of 143 isolates, positive for the wzxO104, were obtained in pure culture from 146 positive fecal samples. Ninety-two of the 143 isolates (64.3%) also tested positive for the wbdDO8/O9/O9a, indicating that only 51 (35.7%) isolates truly belonged to the O104 serogroup (positive for wzxO104 and negative for wbdDO8/O9/O9a). All 51 isolates tested negative for eae, and 16 tested positive for stx1 gene of the subtype 1c. Thirteen of the 16 stx1-positive O104 isolates were from one feedlot. The predominant serotype was O104:H7. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis analysis indicated that stx1-positive O104:H7 isolates had 62.4% homology to the German outbreak strain and 67.9% to 77.5% homology to human diarrheagenic O104:H7 strains. The 13 isolates obtained from the same feedlot were of the same PFGE subtype with 100% Dice similarity. Although cattle do not harbor the O104:H4 pathotype, they do harbor and shed Shiga toxigenic O104 in the feces and the predominant serotype was O104:H7.
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.