Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28744833›Full record

ArticleProbiotics and antimicrobial proteins2018

Evaluation of In Vivo Probiotic Efficiency of Bacillus amyloliquefaciens in Labeo rohita Challenged by Pathogenic Strain of Aeromonas hydrophila MTCC 1739.

Ankita Nandi, Goutam Banerjee, Suhas Kumar Dan, Koushik Ghosh, Arun Kumar Ray

Abstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Microorganisms · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Comparative Study ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Effect ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2019
    Article
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ankita NandiDepartment of Zoology, Visva-Bharati University, Santiniketan, West Bengal, -731235, India.
Goutam BanerjeeDepartment of Zoology, Visva-Bharati University, Santiniketan, West Bengal, -731235, India. banerjee.goutam3@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-6231-6065
Suhas Kumar DanDepartment of Zoology, Visva-Bharati University, Santiniketan, West Bengal, -731235, India.
Koushik GhoshDepartment of Zoology, University of Burdwan, Golap Bag, Burdwan, West Bengal, -713104, India.
Arun Kumar RayDepartment of Zoology, Visva-Bharati University, Santiniketan, West Bengal, -731235, India.
Visva-Bharati University · INUniversity of Burdwan · INUniversity of Calcutta · IN

Funding

Department of Science and Technology, India IF120680
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diseases in aquatic organisms, including fish, are a major concern in aquaculture production. In this present investigation, we have evaluated the beneficial effects of dietary Bacillus amyloliquefaciens CCF7 (GenBank Acc. No. KP256501) supplementation in rohu (Labeo rohita) challenged by a pathogenic strain of Aeromonas hydrophila MTCC 1739. Four experimental diets were formulated: control diet (no probiotics) and three experimental diets (different concentrations of probiotic candidate B. amyloliquefaciens CCF7 at 10

Indexed as

Aeromonas hydrophilaAnimal FeedAnimalsAquacultureBacillus amyloliquefaciensCyprinidaeDietary SupplementsDisease ResistanceFish DiseasesFish ProteinsGram-Negative Bacterial InfectionsProbioticsFish ProteinsHaematological parametersLysozymeOxidative stress profileProbioticRohuSerum IgM

Identifiers

PMID28744833
OpenAlexW2738053437

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.