ArticlePloS one2017
Development and Validation of a New Reliable Method for the Diagnosis of Avian Botulism.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Laboratory Diagnostics of Botulism Cases in Livestock in Poland in 2022-2024.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Identification of botulism C/D in 2 dogsThe Canadian veterinary journal = La revue veterinaire canadienne · 2026Article
- Article
- Diagnosis of botulism in mammals aided by toxin ELISA and C and D gene RT-PCRs with an emphasis on farm animals.Veterinary research communications · 2024Article
- Human and animal botulism surveillance in France from 2008 to 2019.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
- Review
- Confirmation of botulism diagnosis in Australian bird samples by ELISA and RT rtPCR.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2021Article
- Modification and validation of the Endopep-mass spectrometry method for botulinum neurotoxin detection in liver samples with application to samples collected during animal botulism outbreaks.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2021Article
- Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Liver is a reliable matrix for laboratory confirmation of avian botulism using real-time PCR. Here, we developed, optimized, and validated the analytical steps preceding PCR to maximize the detection of Clostridium botulinum group III in avian liver. These pre-PCR steps included enrichment incubation of the whole liver (maximum 25 g) at 37°C for at least 24 h in an anaerobic chamber and DNA extraction using an enzymatic digestion step followed by a DNA purification step. Conditions of sample storage before analysis appear to have a strong effect on the detection of group III C. botulinum strains and our results recommend storage at temperatures below -18°C. Short-term storage at 5°C is possible for up to 24 h, but a decrease in sensitivity was observed at 48 h of storage at this temperature. Analysis of whole livers (maximum 25 g) is required and pooling samples before enrichment culturing must be avoided. Pooling is however possible before or after DNA extraction under certain conditions. Whole livers should be 10-fold diluted in enrichment medium and homogenized using a Pulsifier® blender (Microgen, Surrey, UK) instead of a conventional paddle blender. Spiked liver samples showed a limit of detection of 5 spores/g liver for types C and D and 250 spores/g for type E. Using the method developed here, the analysis of 268 samples from 73 suspected outbreaks showed 100% specificity and 95.35% sensitivity compared with other PCR-based methods considered as reference. The mosaic type C/D was the most common neurotoxin type found in examined samples, which included both wild and domestic birds.
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.