ArticleBMC microbiology2018
Ultrasensitive and rapid count of Escherichia coli using magnetic nanoparticle probe under dark-field microscope.
Article in BMC microbiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- A glyco-engineered nanoplatform for fluorescence detection and adsorptive elimination ofNanoscale advances · 2026Article
- Truncated M13 phage for smart detection of E. coli under dark field.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2024Article
- Nanotechnology-Based Diagnostics for Diseases Prevalent in Developing Countries: Current Advances in Point-of-Care Tests.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Optical Methods for Label-Free Detection of Bacteria.Biosensors · 2022Review
- A Specific and Sensitive Aptamer-Based Digital PCR Chip forBiosensors · 2022Article
- Electrochemical Detection of Waterborne Bacteria Using Bi-Functional Magnetic Nanoparticle Conjugates.Biosensors · 2022Article
- Recent advances in magnetic nanoparticle-based microfluidic devices for the pretreatment of pathogenic bacteria.Biomedical engineering letters · 2021Review
- Polyaza functionalized graphene oxide nanomaterial based sensor for Escherichia coli detection in water matrices.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Dark-field microscopy enhance visibility of CD31 endothelial staining.European journal of histochemistry : EJH · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEscherichia coli (E. coli) is one of the best-known zoonotic bacterial species, which pathogenic strain can cause infections in humans and animals. However, existing technologies or methods are deficient for quickly on-site identifying infection of E. coli before they breakout. Herein, we present an ultrasensitive and on-site method for counting E. coli using magnetic nanoparticle (MNP) probe under a dark-field in 30 min.
resultsThe antibodies functionalized MNP, binding to E. coli to form a golden ring-like structure under a dark-field microscope, allowing for counting E. coli. This method via counting MNP-conjugated E. coli under dark-field microscope demonstrated the sensitivity of 6 CFU/μL for E. coli detection. Importantly, due to the advantages such as time-saving (only 30 min) and almost free of instrument (only require a portable microscope), our MNP-labeled dark-field counting strategy has the potential of being a universal tool for on-site quantifying a variety of pathogens with size ranges from a few hundreds of nanometers to a few micrometers.
conclusionIn summary, the MNP-labeled dark-field counting strategy is a rapid, simple, sensitive as well as low-cost assay strategy, which has the potential of being a universal tool for on-site quantification of micrometer-size pathogens like E. coli.
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.