Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30866824›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2019

Comparative genomic analysis of 127 Escherichia coli strains isolated from domestic animals with diarrhea in China.

Fang Tang, Juanfang Wang, Dezhi Li, Song Gao, Jianluan Ren, Liqing Ma, Fei Liu, Xiangkai Zhuge, Genqiang Yan, Yan Lu and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Two Multidrug-ResistantPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Evaluation ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Safety assessment ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Article
  13. Antimicrobial resistance surveillance ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. 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

11 authors.

Fang TangKey Lab Animal Bacteriology, Ministry of Agriculture; Joint International Research Laboratory of Animal Health and Food Safety, College of Veterinary Medicine, Nanjing Agricultural University, No.1 Weigang, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210095, People's Republic of China.
Juanfang WangKey Lab Animal Bacteriology, Ministry of Agriculture; Joint International Research Laboratory of Animal Health and Food Safety, College of Veterinary Medicine, Nanjing Agricultural University, No.1 Weigang, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210095, People's Republic of China.
Dezhi LiKey Lab Animal Bacteriology, Ministry of Agriculture; Joint International Research Laboratory of Animal Health and Food Safety, College of Veterinary Medicine, Nanjing Agricultural University, No.1 Weigang, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210095, People's Republic of China.
Song GaoJiangsu Co-innovation Center for Prevention and Control of Important Animal Infectious Diseases and Zoonoses, College of Veterinary Medicine, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou, Jiangsu, 225009, People's Republic of China.
Jianluan RenKey Lab Animal Bacteriology, Ministry of Agriculture; Joint International Research Laboratory of Animal Health and Food Safety, College of Veterinary Medicine, Nanjing Agricultural University, No.1 Weigang, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210095, People's Republic of China.
Liqing MaQinghai Academy of veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, Qinghai University, Xining, Qinghai Province, People's Republic of China.
Fei LiuCAS key Laboratory of Pathogenic Microbiology and Immunology, Institute of Microbiology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, People's Republic of China.
Xiangkai ZhugeKey Lab Animal Bacteriology, Ministry of Agriculture; Joint International Research Laboratory of Animal Health and Food Safety, College of Veterinary Medicine, Nanjing Agricultural University, No.1 Weigang, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210095, People's Republic of China.
Genqiang YanCollege of Animal Science and Technology, Shihezi University, Shihezi, Xinjiang, 832003, People's Republic of China.
Yan LuQinghai Academy of veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, Qinghai University, Xining, Qinghai Province, People's Republic of China.
Jianjun DaiKey Lab Animal Bacteriology, Ministry of Agriculture; Joint International Research Laboratory of Animal Health and Food Safety, College of Veterinary Medicine, Nanjing Agricultural University, No.1 Weigang, Nanjing, Jiangsu Province, 210095, People's Republic of China. daijianjun@njau.edu.cn.

Funding

National Basic Research Program of China 2015CB554203Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province BK20180075
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEscherichia coli is an important pathogen that causes diarrhea in both humans and animals. To determine the relationships between putative virulence factors and pathotypes or host taxa, many molecular studies on diarrhea-associated E. coli have been reported. However, little is known regarding genome-wide variation of E. coli from animal hosts. In this study, we performed whole genome sequencing of 127 E. coli isolates from sheep and swine with diarrhea in China. We compared isolates to explore the phylogenomic relatedness based on host origin. We explored the relationships of putative virulence factors across host taxa and pathotypes. Antimicrobial resistance was also tested.

resultsThe E. coli genomes in this study were diverse with clear differences in the SNP, MLST, and O serotypes. Seven putative virulence factors (VFs) were prevalent (> 95%) across the isolates, including Hcp, csgC, dsdA, feoB, fepA, guaA, and malX. Sixteen putative VFs showed significantly different distributions (P < 0.05) in strains from sheep and swine and were primarily adhesion- and toxin-related genes. Some putative VFs were co-occurrent in some specific pathotypes and O serotypes. The distribution of 4525 accessory genes of the 127 strains significantly differed (P < 0.05) between isolates obtained from the two animal species. The 127 animal isolates sequenced in this study were each classified into one of five pathotypes: EAEC, ETEC, STEC, DAEC, and EPEC, with 66.9% of isolates belonging to EAEC. Analysis of stx subtypes and a minimum spanning tree based on MLST revealed that STEC isolates from sheep and EAEC isolates from sheep and swine have low potential to infect humans. Antibiotic resistance analysis showed that the E. coli isolates were highly resistant to ampicillin and doxycycline. Isolates from southeast China were more resistant to antibiotics than isolates from northwest China. Additionally, the plasmid-mediated colist in resistance gene mcr-1 was detected in 15 isolates, including 4 from sheep in Qinghai and 11 from swine in Jiangsu.

conclusionsOur study provides insight into the genomes of E. coli isolated from animal sources. Distinguishable differences between swine and sheep isolates at the genomic level provides a baseline for future investigations of animal E. coli pathogens.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnimals, DomesticBacterial Typing TechniquesChinaDiarrheaDrug Resistance, BacterialEscherichia coliEscherichia coli InfectionsEscherichia coli ProteinsGenomicsMultilocus Sequence TypingPhylogenyPolymorphism, Single NucleotideSequence Analysis, DNASerogroupSheepEscherichia coli ProteinsVirulence FactorsAnimal isolatesDiarrheaEscherichia coliGenomePutative virulence factor

Identifiers

PMID30866824
PMCPMC6416869

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.