ArticleLetters in applied microbiology2020
Recovery of thermophilic Campylobacter by three sampling methods from river sites in Northeast Georgia, USA, and their antimicrobial resistance genes.
Article in Letters in applied microbiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- New Campylobacter Lineages in New Zealand Freshwater: Pathogenesis and Public Health Implications.Environmental microbiology · 2024Article
- Methodological differences between studies confound one-size-fits-all approaches to managing surface waterways for food and water safety.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the soil and water assessment tool (SWAT) for simulating E. coli concentrations at the watershed-scale.The Science of the total environment · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Sixteen sites in the watershed of the South Fork of the Broad River (SFBR) in Northeastern Georgia, USA, were sampled in two seasons to detect Campylobacter. Sites were classified as mostly influenced by forest, pasture, wastewater pollution control plants (WPC) or mixed use. Sampling was repeated in the late spring and late fall for 2 years for a total of 126 samples. Free-catch water and sediment grab samples were taken at each site; Moore's swabs were placed for up to 3 days at most sites. A total of 56 isolates of thermophilic Campylobacter were recovered. Thirteen samplings were positive by two or three methods, and 26 samplings were positive by only one method; once by Moore's swab only and 25 times by free-catch water only. Campylobacter was detected at 58% of cattle pasture sites, 30% of forested sites and 81% of WPC sites. Twenty-one of the isolates carried antimicrobial resistance genes, mostly blaOXA-61. Free-catch water samples were more efficient than Moore's swabs or sediment samples for recovery of Campylobacter, which was more likely to be detected in streams near cattle pastures and human communities than in forested land. SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY: The role of environmental water in transmitting Campylobacter was investigated, and methods for recovery of the organism were compared. The sequence types of recovered Campylobacter correlated with adjacent land use without regard to the method used to isolate the organisms. Sequence types and antimicrobial resistance genes associated with cattle were most prevalent near pastures. Even though types were recurrent at a given site, types appeared to be lost or replaced as the water flowed downstream.
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.