ArticleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Antimicrobial Activity of Five Apitoxins from
Article in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Investigating the Effect of Melittin Peptide in Preventing Biofilm Formation, Adhesion and Expression of Virulence Genes in Listeria monocytogenes.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2025Article
- Antimicrobial Potential of Bee-Derived Products: Insights into Honey, Propolis and Bee Venom.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Pharmacological properties and therapeutic potential of honey bee venom.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2023Review
- Biologically Active Extracts from Different Medicinal Plants Tested as Potential Additives against Bee Pathogens.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Pharmaceutical Prospects of Bee Products: Special Focus on Anticancer, Antibacterial, Antiviral, and Antiparasitic Properties.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Antimicrobial resistance is one of today's major public health challenges. Infections caused by multidrug-resistant bacteria have been responsible for an increasing number of deaths in recent decades. These resistant bacteria are also a concern in the food chain, as bacteria can resist common biocides used in the food industry and reach consumers. As a consequence, the search for alternatives to common antimicrobials by the scientific community has intensified. Substances obtained from nature have shown great potential as new sources of antimicrobial activity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the antimicrobial activity of five bee venoms, also called apitoxins, against two common foodborne pathogens. A total of 50 strains of the Gram-negative pathogen
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.