Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29145870›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2017

Bacillus anthracis gamma phage lysis among soil bacteria: an update on test specificity.

Cari B Kolton, Nicole L Podnecky, Sean V Shadomy, Jay E Gee, Alex R Hoffmaster

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Anthrax: A narrative review.New microbes and new infections · 2024
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Rapid Microscopic Detection ofMicroorganisms · 2020
    Article
  6. Detection and Identification ofMicroorganisms · 2020
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Properties of Poly-γ-Glutamic Acid Producing-Frontiers 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 2 countries.

Cari B KoltonCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA, USA. fts3@cdc.gov.
Nicole L PodneckyCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Sean V ShadomyCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Jay E GeeCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Alex R HoffmasterCenters for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, GA, USA.
United States Department of Health and Human Services · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · USFood and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBacillus anthracis, which causes anthrax in humans and animals, is enzootic in parts of the U.S. state of Texas where cases are typically reported in animals annually. The gamma phage lysis assay is a common diagnostic method for identification of B. anthracis and is based on the bacterium's susceptibility to lysis. This test has been shown to be 97% specific for B. anthracis, as a small number of strains of other Bacillus spp. are known to be susceptible. In this study, we evaluated the performance of a combination of B. anthracis diagnostic assays on 700 aerobic, spore-forming isolates recovered from soil collected in Texas. These assays include phenotypic descriptions, gamma phage susceptibility, and real-time polymerase chain reaction specific for B. anthracis. Gamma phage-susceptible isolates were also tested using cell wall and capsule direct fluorescent-antibody assays specific for B. anthracis. Gamma phage-susceptible isolates that were ruled out as B. anthracis were identified by 16S rRNA gene sequencing.

findingsWe identified 29 gamma phage-susceptible isolates. One was confirmed as B. anthracis, while the other 28 isolates were ruled out for B. anthracis by the other diagnostic tests. Using 16S rRNA gene sequencing results, we identified these isolates as members of the B. cereus group, Bacillus sp. (not within B. cereus group), Lysinibacillus spp., and Solibacillus silvestris. Based on these results, we report a specificity of 96% for gamma phage lysis as a diagnostic test for B. anthracis, and identified susceptible isolates outside the Bacillus genus.

conclusionsIn this study we found gamma phage susceptibility to be consistent with previously reported results. However, we identified non-B. anthracis environmental isolates (including isolates from genera other than Bacillus) that are susceptible to gamma phage lysis. To date, susceptibility to gamma phage lysis has not been reported in genera other than Bacillus. Though these isolates are not of clinical origin, description of unexpected positives is important, especially as new diagnostic assays for B. anthracis are being developed based on gamma phage lysis or gamma phage proteins.

Indexed as

Bacillus PhagesBacteriolysisSoil MicrobiologyBacillus anthracisMolecular TypingTexasAnthraxBacillus anthracisGamma phage

Identifiers

PMID29145870
PMCPMC5691394
OpenAlexW2768797719

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.