Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28724491›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS2017

Comparison of Antemortem and Environmental Samples for Zebrafish Health Monitoring and Quarantine.

Marcus J Crim, Christian Lawrence, Robert S Livingston, Andrei Rakitin, Shane J Hurley, Lela K Riley

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Application of an eDNA assay for the detection ofAquaculture (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023
    Article
  2. Health Monitoring for Laboratory Salamanders.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Recent Advances with Fish Microsporidia.Experientia supplementum (2012) · 2022
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Testing Alternative Surface Disinfection Agents for Zebrafish (Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2021
    Article
  10. Comparative medicine · 2021
    Article
  11. PCR and RT-PCR in the Diagnosis of Laboratory Animal Infections and in Health Monitoring.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2020
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Viability ofZebrafish · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Marcus J CrimIDEXX BioResearch, Columbia, Missouri, Department of Veterinary Pathobiology, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri;, Email: Marcus-Crim@idexx.com.
Christian LawrenceBoston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Robert S LivingstonIDEXX BioResearch, Columbia, Missouri.
Andrei RakitinIDEXX Laboratories, Westbrook, Maine.
Shane J HurleyBoston Children's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Lela K RileyIDEXX BioResearch, Columbia, Missouri.
IDEXX Laboratories (United States) · USBoston Children's Hospital · USBoston Children's Museum · USUniversity of Missouri · US

Funding

CORE--ZEBRAFISHP30DK049216 · NIDDK · CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL BOSTON · PI ORKIN, STUART H · 1999 to 2015
$14.3M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK049216
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Molecular diagnostic assays offer both exquisite sensitivity and the ability to test a wide variety of sample types. Various types of environmental sample, such as detritus and concentrated water, might provide a useful adjunct to sentinels in routine zebrafish health monitoring. Similarly, antemortem sampling would be advantageous for expediting zebrafish quarantine, without euthanasia of valuable fish. We evaluated the detection of Mycobacterium chelonae, M. fortuitum, M. peregrinum, Pseudocapillaria tomentosa, and Pseudoloma neurophilia in zebrafish, detritus, pooled feces, and filter membranes after filtration of 1000-, 500-, and 150-mL water samples by real-time PCR analysis. Sensitivity varied according to sample type and pathogen, and environmental sampling was significantly more sensitive than zebrafish sampling for detecting Mycobacterium spp. but not for Pseudocapillaria neurophilia or Pseudoloma tomentosa. The results of these experiments provide strong evidence of the utility of multiple sample types for detecting pathogens according to each pathogen's life cycle and ecological niche within zebrafish systems. In a separate experiment, zebrafish subclinically infected with M. chelonae, M. marinum, Pleistophora hyphessobryconis, Pseudocapillaria tomentosa, or Pseudoloma neurophilia were pair-spawned and individually tested with subsets of embryos from each clutch that received no rinse, a fluidizing rinse, or were surface-disinfected with sodium hypochlorite. Frequently, one or both parents were subclinically infected with pathogen(s) that were not detected in any embryo subset. Therefore, negative results from embryo samples may not reflect the health status of the parent zebrafish.

Indexed as

ZebrafishAnimalsEmbryo, NonmammalianFish DiseasesInfectionsMicrosporidiaMycobacteriumNematodaQuarantineReal-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction

Identifiers

PMID28724491
PMCPMC5517331
OpenAlexW2990968539

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.