ArticleEpidemics2017
Mathematical modeling of ovine footrot in the UK: the effect of Dichelobacter nodosus and Fusobacterium necrophorum on the disease dynamics.
Article in Epidemics, 2017. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- An outbreak of Fusobacterium necrophorum associated foot rot in a herd of four-horned antelope (Veterinary research forum : an international quarterly journal · 2025Article
- Effects of Dietary Protein Level on the Microbial Composition and Metabolomic Profile in Postweaning Piglets.Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity · 2022Article
- Characterisation ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
- Evaluation of Immunoprotective Effects ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2021Article
- A Pilot Study to Investigate the Feasibility of a Multiple Locus Variable Number Tandem Repeat Analysis to Understand the Epidemiology ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2020Article
- Sites of persistence of Fusobacterium necrophorum and Dichelobacter nodosus: a paradigm shift in understanding the epidemiology of footrot in sheep.Scientific reports · 2019Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Dichelobacter nodosus is a virulent, invasive, anaerobic bacterium that is believed to be the causative agent of ovine footrot, an infectious bacterial disease of sheep that causes lameness. Another anaerobe, Fusobacterium necrophorum, has been intimately linked with the disease occurrence and severity. Here we examine data from a longitudinal study of footrot on one UK farm, including quantitative PCR (qPCR) estimates of bacterial load of D. nodosus and F. necrophorum. The data is at foot level; all feet were monitored for five weeks assessing disease severity (healthy, interdigital dermatitis (ID), or severe footrot (SFR)) and bacterial load (number of bacteria/swab). We investigate the role of D. nodosus and F. necrophorum in the progress of the disease using a continuous-time Markov model with 12 different states characterising the foot. The transition rates between the adjacent states are the (34) model parameters, these are determined using Metropolis Hasting MCMC. Our aim is to determine the predictive relationship between past and future D. nodosus and F. necrophorum load and disease states. We demonstrate a high level of predictive accuracy at the population level for the D. nodosus model, although the dynamics of individual feet is highly stochastic. However, we note that this predictive accuracy at population level is only high in more diseased states for F. necrophorum model. This supports our hypothesis that D. nodosus load and status of the foot work in combination to give rise to severe footrot and lameness, and that D. nodosus load plays the primary role in the initiation and progression of footrot, while F. necrophorum load rather increases disease severity of SFR.
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.