ArticleBMC genomics2018
New insights into phylogeography of worldwide Brucella canis isolates by comparative genomics-based approaches: focus on Brazil.
Article in BMC genomics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- One Health approach for Brucella canis: Serological and molecular detection in animal-hoarding individuals and their dogs.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024Article
- The emergence ofEmerging microbes & infections · 2023Review
- A mixed-methods approach to understanding domestic dog health and disease transmission risk in an indigenous reserve in Guyana, South America.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2022Article
- Prevalence and Genomic Characterization ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020Article
- MALDI-TOF MS and genomic analysis can make the difference in the clarification of canine brucellosis outbreaks.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Genome Sequences of Five Brucella canis Strains Isolated from Different Countries throughout the World.Microbiology resource announcements · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCanine brucellosis, due to Brucella canis, is a worldwide zoonosis that remains endemic in South America, including Brazil. Implementation of powerful whole-genome sequencing approaches allowed exploring the Brucella genus considered as monomorphic, with, to date, more than 500 genomes available in public databases. Nevertheless, with under-representation of B. canis genomes -only twenty complete or draft genomes-, lack of knowledge about this species is still considerable. This report describes a comparative genomics-based phylogeographic investigation of 53 B. canis strains, including 28 isolates paired-end sequenced in this work.
resultsObtained results allow identifying a SNP panel species-specific to B. canis of 1086 nucleotides. In addition, high-resolution analyses assess the epidemiological relationship between worldwide isolates. Our findings show worldwide strains are distributed among 2 distinct lineages. One of them seems to be specific to South American strains, including Brazil. B. canis South American strains may be identified by a SNP panel of 15 nucleotides, whereas a 22 SNP panel is sufficient to define contamination origin from Brazil. These results lead to the proposal of a possible spread route for dog brucellosis through South America. Additionally, whole-genome analyses highlight the remarkable genomic stability of B. canis strains over time and the sustainability of the infection in São Paulo over 12 year-period.
conclusionsSignificant increase of B. canis genomes available in public databases provides new insights into B. canis infection in South America, including Brazil, as well as in the world, and also offers new perspectives for the Brucella genus largo sensu.
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.