Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32516320›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Evaluation of the bacterial ocular surface microbiome in ophthalmologically normal dogs prior to and following treatment with topical neomycin-polymyxin-bacitracin.

Callie M Rogers, Erin M Scott, Benjamin Sarawichitr, Carolyn Arnold, Jan S Suchodolski

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Ocular Microbiome in a Group of Clinically Healthy Horses.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Callie M RogersDepartment of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine & Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-0684-7283
Erin M ScottDepartment of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine & Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9702-7298
Benjamin SarawichitrDepartment of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine & Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States of America.
Carolyn ArnoldDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine & Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States of America.
Jan S SuchodolskiDepartment of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine & Biomedical Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States of America.
Texas A&M University · US

Funding

Veterinary Student Research TrainingT35OD010991 · OD · TEXAS A&M AGRILIFE RESEARCH · PI GADDY, DANA · 2012 to 2025
$920k
NIH HHS T35 OD010991
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ocular surface microbiome of veterinary species has not been thoroughly characterized using molecular-based techniques, such as next generation sequencing (NGS), as the vast majority of studies have utilized traditional culture-based techniques. To date, there is one pilot study evaluating the ocular surface of healthy dogs using NGS. Furthermore, alterations in the ocular surface microbiome over time and after topical antibiotic treatment are unknown. The objectives of this study were to describe the bacterial composition of the ocular surface microbiome in clinically normal dogs, and to determine if microbial community changes occur over time or following topical antibiotic therapy. Topical neomycin-polymyxin-bacitracin ophthalmic ointment was applied to one eye each of 13 adult dogs three times daily for seven days, while contralateral eyes served as untreated controls. The inferior conjunctival fornix of both eyes was sampled via swabbing at baseline prior to antibiotic therapy (day 0), after 1 week of treatment (day 7), and 4 weeks after discontinuing treatment (day 35). Genomic DNA was extracted from the conjunctival swabs and primers targeting the V4 region of bacterial 16S rRNA genes were used to generate amplicon libraries, which were then sequenced on an Illumina platform. Data were analyzed using Quantitative Insights Into Molecular Ecology (QIIME 2.0). At baseline, the most relatively abundant phyla sequenced were Proteobacteria (49.7%), Actinobacteria (25.5%), Firmicutes (12%), Bacteroidetes (7.5%), and Fusobacteria (1.4%). The most common families detected were Pseudomonadaceae (13.2%), Micrococcaceae (12%), Pasteurellaceae (6.9%), Microbacteriaceae (5.2%), Enterobacteriaceae (3.9%), Neisseriaceae (3.5%), and Corynebacteriaceae (3.3%). Alpha and beta diversity measurements did not differ in both control and treatment eyes over time. This report examines the temporal stability of the canine ocular surface microbiome. The major bacterial taxa on the canine ocular surface remained consistent over time and following topical antibiotic therapy.

Indexed as

Administration, TopicalAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacitracinBacteriaConjunctivaDNA PrimersDogsEyeFemaleHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingMaleMicrobiotaNeomycinOcular Physiological PhenomenaPolymyxinsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacitracinDNA PrimersNeomycinPolymyxinsRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID32516320
PMCPMC7282667
OpenAlexW3034081635

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.