ArticleCommunications biology2019
High-throughput isolation of giant viruses using high-content screening.
Article in Communications biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Why did some viruses evolve to be giants while others did not?Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Article
- Giant virus biology and diversity in the era of genome-resolved metagenomics.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2022Review
- Diversity of Giant Viruses InfectingFrontiers in microbiology · 2022Review
- Kinetic Analysis of Acanthamoeba castellanii Infected with Giant Viruses Quantitatively Revealed Process of Morphological and Behavioral Changes in Host Cells.Microbiology spectrum · 2021Article
- Article
- Morphological and Taxonomic Properties of the Newly IsolatedJournal of virology · 2021Article
- High-speed large-scale automated isolation of SARS-CoV-2 from clinical samples using miniaturized co-culture coupled to high-content screening.Clinical microbiology and infection : the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases · 2021Article
- Unraveling gene content variation across eukaryotic giant viruses based on network analyses and host associations.Virus evolution · 2021Article
- A protein of the metallo-hydrolase/oxidoreductase superfamily with both beta-lactamase and ribonuclease activity is linked with translation in giant viruses.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Article
- High-Content Screening, a Reliable System for Coxiella burnetii Isolation from Clinical Samples.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2020Article
- Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The race to discover and isolate giant viruses began 15 years ago. Metagenomics is counterbalancing coculture, with the detection of giant virus genomes becoming faster as sequencing technologies develop. Since the discovery of giant viruses, many efforts have been made to improve methods for coculturing amebas and giant viruses, which remains the key engine of isolation of these microorganisms. However, these techniques still lack the proper tools for high-speed detection. In this paper, we present advances in the isolation of giant viruses. A new strategy was developed using a high-throughput microscope for real-time monitoring of cocultures using optimized algorithms targeting infected amebas. After validating the strategy, we adapted a new tabletop scanning electron microscope for high-speed identification of giant viruses directly from culture. The speed and isolation rate of this strategy has raised the coculture to almost the same level as sequencing techniques in terms of detection speed and sensitivity.
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.