Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28906178›Full record

ArticleJournal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc2018

Comparison of whole genome sequencing to restriction endonuclease analysis and gel diffusion precipitin-based serotyping of Pasteurella multocida.

Karen J LeCount, Linda K Schlater, Tod Stuber, Suelee Robbe Austerman, Timothy S Frana, Ronald W Griffith, Matthew M Erdman

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 42% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Complete genome sequences of eightMicrobiology resource announcements · 2024
    Article
  2. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Karen J LeCountDiagnostic Bacteriology Laboratory, National Veterinary Services Laboratories, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Service, Ames, IA (LeCount, Schlater, Stuber, Robbe Austerman, Erdman).
Linda K SchlaterDiagnostic Bacteriology Laboratory, National Veterinary Services Laboratories, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Service, Ames, IA (LeCount, Schlater, Stuber, Robbe Austerman, Erdman).
Tod StuberDiagnostic Bacteriology Laboratory, National Veterinary Services Laboratories, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Service, Ames, IA (LeCount, Schlater, Stuber, Robbe Austerman, Erdman).
Suelee Robbe AustermanDiagnostic Bacteriology Laboratory, National Veterinary Services Laboratories, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Service, Ames, IA (LeCount, Schlater, Stuber, Robbe Austerman, Erdman).
Timothy S FranaDiagnostic Bacteriology Laboratory, National Veterinary Services Laboratories, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Service, Ames, IA (LeCount, Schlater, Stuber, Robbe Austerman, Erdman).
Ronald W GriffithDiagnostic Bacteriology Laboratory, National Veterinary Services Laboratories, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Service, Ames, IA (LeCount, Schlater, Stuber, Robbe Austerman, Erdman).
Matthew M ErdmanDiagnostic Bacteriology Laboratory, National Veterinary Services Laboratories, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Veterinary Service, Ames, IA (LeCount, Schlater, Stuber, Robbe Austerman, Erdman).
Iowa State University · USAnimal and Plant Health Inspection Service · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The gel diffusion precipitin test (GDPT) and restriction endonuclease analysis (REA) have commonly been used in the serotyping and genotyping of Pasteurella multocida. Whole genome sequencing (WGS) and single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) analysis has become the gold standard for other organisms, offering higher resolution than previously available methods. We compared WGS to REA and GDPT on 163 isolates of P. multocida to determine if WGS produced more precise results. The isolates used represented the 16 reference serovars, isolates with REA profiles matching an attenuated fowl cholera vaccine strain, and isolates from 10 different animal species. Isolates originated from across the United States and from Chile. Identical REA profiles clustered together in the phylogenetic tree. REA profiles that differed by only a few bands had fewer SNP differences than REA profiles with more differences, as expected. The GDPT results were diverse but it was common to see a single serovar show up repeatedly within clusters. Several errors were found when examining the REA profiles. WGS was able to confirm these errors and compensate for the subjectivity in analysis of REA. Also, results of WGS and SNP analysis correlated more closely with the epidemiologic data than GDPT. In silico results were also compared to a lipopolysaccharide rapid multiplex PCR test. From the data produced in our study, WGS and SNP analysis was superior to REA and GDPT and highlighted some of the issues with the older tests.

Indexed as

AnimalsBacterial ProteinsDNA, BacterialDNA Restriction EnzymesImmunodiffusionPasteurella InfectionsPasteurella multocidaPhylogenyPrecipitinsRestriction MappingSerotypingWhole Genome SequencingBacterial ProteinsDNA, BacterialDNA Restriction EnzymesPrecipitinsPasteurella multocidarestriction endonuclease analysiswhole genome sequence

Identifiers

PMID28906178
PMCPMC6504148
OpenAlexW2530095200

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.