ArticlePloS one2018
A comparison of methods to assess the antimicrobial activity of nanoparticle combinations on bacterial cells.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 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
39 citing papers in PubMed, 93 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhancing the Antibacterial Activity of Zinc-Based Layered Double Hydroxide Nanoparticles in the Presence of UVACS omega · 2026Article
- In vitro antibacterial properties of selected medicinal plants used by traditional healers for gastrointestinal disorders in the Heban-Arsi and Kofale districts of Southern Ethiopia.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2026Article
- Preliminary in-vitro antibacterial evaluation of a novel formula of calcium phosphate nanoparticle-chlorhexidine intracanal medicament using confocal laser scanning microscopy.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Crosslinked-AuNPs@CD-MOF Incorporated into PLA-Zein Composite Film with Humidity-Responsive Antimicrobial Release forFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Nanoencapsulated α-Mangostin Loaded Chitosan-Alginate Hydrogel Films for Enhanced Topical Anti Acne Therapy.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Article
- Article
- Multifunctional hyaluronic acid-based biomimetic/pH-responsive hybrid nanostructured lipid carriers for treating bacterial sepsis.Journal of biomedical science · 2025Article
- Postbiotics in the Bakery Products: Applications and Nutritional Values.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2025Review
- Exploring Antibacterial Activity of Fish Protein Hydrolysate In Vitro AgainstAquaculture nutrition · 2025Article
- Silver/tannic acid nanoparticles/ poly-L-lysine decorated polyvinyl alcohol-hydrogel as a hybrid wound dressing.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Methods for screening and evaluation of antimicrobial activity: A review of protocols, advantages, and limitations.European journal of microbiology & immunology · 2024Review
- Biodegradation of polystyrene nanoplastics by Achromobacter xylosoxidans M9 offers a mealworm gut-derived solution for plastic pollution.Archives of microbiology · 2024Article
- Knowledge about methods of disinfection of dental impression among dentists from Ecuador post SARS-COV-2 pandemic.Heliyon · 2024Article
- Applied Methods to Assess the Antimicrobial Activity of Metallic-Based Nanoparticles.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Correction: Enhanced detoxification of CrNanoscale advances · 2023Article
- Enhanced detoxification of CrNanoscale advances · 2023Article
- High-Throughput Screening of Natural Product and Synthetic Molecule Libraries for Antibacterial Drug Discovery.Metabolites · 2023Review
- Analytical methods for assessing antimicrobial activity of nanomaterials in complex media: advances, challenges, and perspectives.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2023Review
- Nutritionally rich biochemical profile in essential oil of various Mentha species and their antimicrobial activities.Protoplasma · 2023Article
- Current Landscape of Methods to Evaluate Antimicrobial Activity of Natural Extracts.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBacterial cell quantification after exposure to antimicrobial compounds varies widely throughout industry and healthcare. Numerous methods are employed to quantify these antimicrobial effects. With increasing demand for new preventative methods for disease control, we aimed to compare and assess common analytical methods used to determine antimicrobial effects of novel nanoparticle combinations on two different pathogens.
methodsPlate counts of total viable cells, flow cytometry (LIVE/DEAD BacLight viability assay) and qPCR (viability qPCR) were used to assess the antimicrobial activity of engineered nanoparticle combinations (NPCs) on Gram-positive (Staphylococcus aureus) and Gram-negative (Pseudomonas aeruginosa) bacteria at different concentrations (0.05, 0.10 and 0.25 w/v%). Results were analysed using linear models to assess the effectiveness of different treatments.
resultsStrong antimicrobial effects of the three NPCs (AMNP0-2) on both pathogens could be quantified using the plate count method and flow cytometry. The plate count method showed a high log reduction (>8-log) for bacteria exposed to high NPC concentrations. We found similar antimicrobial results using the flow cytometry live/dead assay. Viability qPCR analysis of antimicrobial activity could not be quantified due to interference of NPCs with qPCR amplification.
conclusionFlow cytometry was determined to be the best method to measure antimicrobial activity of the novel NPCs due to high-throughput, rapid and quantifiable results.
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.