ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2019
A Comparison of 16S rRNA Profiles Through Slaughter in Australian Export Beef Abattoirs.
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- The faecal microbiome and carriage of Salmonella in Australian captive pythons.FEMS microbiology ecology · 2026Article
- Fresh pork microbiota is temporally dynamic and compositionally diverse across meat, contact surfaces, and processing lines in a pork processing facility.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2025Article
- Microbiome characterization of two fresh pork cuts during production in a pork fabrication facility.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Driving forces shaping the microbial ecology in meat packing plants.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
- The sources and transmission routes of microbial populations throughout a meat processing facility.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microbial contamination of beef cattle carcases and subsequent cross-contamination during processing is inevitable and virtually impossible to prevent. The understanding of microbial contamination in the beef industry is currently limited to hypotheses based on traditional microbiological tools. Additionally, the complex structural and functional responses of beef cattle microbial communities to the fragmentation in the supply chain remain unknown. This study used 16S rRNA gene sequencing in combination with traditional microbiology to monitor and compare changes in the microbiota throughout slaughter in an integrated (abattoir A) and a fragmented (abattoir B) beef abattoir in Australia. Briefly, the primary difference between an integrated and a fragmented abattoir is that fragmented abattoirs receive cattle from multiple sources, whereas integrated abattoirs typically receive cattle that has been produced using the same production system and from a limited number of sources. The composition in the bacterial communities varied between the abattoirs, though the presence of the most predominant bacterial species within the microbiota at each abattoir was similar. Lactobacillales (2.4-56.2%) and Pseudomonadales (2.4-59.4%) most notably dominated hides, carcases, and the environment in abattoir B. In abattoir A, Bacteroidales (3.9-43.8%), Lactobacillales (0.0-61.9%), and Pseudomonadales (0.5-72.1%) fluctuated but generally shared the dominance over the rest. Combined results of total viable count (TVC) and 16S rRNA gene profiling indicated that an upward hide pulling system adopted by abattoir B may lead to increased transmission of hide contaminants to post-hide pull carcases. Abattoir B had 3.2 log
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.