Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31554892›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Development of a qPCR platform for quantification of the five bacteriophages within bacteriophage cocktail 2 (BFC2).

Hans Duyvejonck, Maya Merabishvili, Jean-Paul Pirnay, Daniel De Vos, Gilbert Verbeken, Jonas Van Belleghem, Tessa Gryp, Julie De Leenheer, Kelly Van der Borght, Leen Van Simaey and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Robust detection in faeces andVeterinary and animal science · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. EudragitPharmaceutics · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

13 authors.

Hans DuyvejonckLaboratory Bacteriology Research (LBR), Department of Diagnostic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. hans.duyvejonck@ugent.be.
Maya MerabishviliLaboratory Bacteriology Research (LBR), Department of Diagnostic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Jean-Paul PirnayLaboratory for Molecular and Cellular Technology (LabMCT), Burn Wound Center, Queen Astrid Military Hospital, Bruynstraat 1, 1120, Brussels, Belgium.
Daniel De VosLaboratory for Molecular and Cellular Technology (LabMCT), Burn Wound Center, Queen Astrid Military Hospital, Bruynstraat 1, 1120, Brussels, Belgium.
Gilbert VerbekenLaboratory for Molecular and Cellular Technology (LabMCT), Burn Wound Center, Queen Astrid Military Hospital, Bruynstraat 1, 1120, Brussels, Belgium.
Jonas Van BelleghemLaboratory Bacteriology Research (LBR), Department of Diagnostic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0002-024X
Tessa GrypLaboratory Bacteriology Research (LBR), Department of Diagnostic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Julie De LeenheerDepartment of Biosciences, Faculty of Education, Health and Social Work, University College Ghent, Keramiekstraat 80, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Kelly Van der BorghtDepartment of Biosciences, Faculty of Education, Health and Social Work, University College Ghent, Keramiekstraat 80, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Leen Van SimaeyLaboratory Bacteriology Research (LBR), Department of Diagnostic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Stefan VermeulenDepartment of Biosciences, Faculty of Education, Health and Social Work, University College Ghent, Keramiekstraat 80, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Els Van MechelenDepartment of Biosciences, Faculty of Education, Health and Social Work, University College Ghent, Keramiekstraat 80, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.
Mario VaneechoutteLaboratory Bacteriology Research (LBR), Department of Diagnostic Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Corneel Heymanslaan 10, 9000, Ghent, Belgium.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4586-203X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To determine phage titers accurately, reproducibly and in a non-laborious and cost-effective manner, we describe the development of a qPCR platform for molecular quantification of five phages present in bacteriophage cocktail 2 (BFC2). We compared the performance of this molecular approach, with regard to quantification and reproducibility, with the standard culture-based double agar overlay method (DAO). We demonstrated that quantification of each of the five phages in BFC2 was possible by means of qPCR, without prior DNA extraction, but yields were significantly higher in comparison to DAO. Although DAO is assumed to provide an indication of the number of infective phage particles, whereas qPCR only provides information on the number of phage genomes, the difference in yield (qPCR/DAO ratio) was observed to be phage-dependent and appeared rather constant for all phages when analyzing different (freshly prepared) stocks of these phages. While DAO is necessary to determine sensitivity of clinical strains against phages in clinical applications, qPCR might be a valid alternative for rapid and reproducible quantification of freshly prepared stocks, after initial establishment of a correction factor towards DAO.

Indexed as

BacteriophagesGenomeReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

PMID31554892
PMCPMC6761158

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.