ArticleScientific reports2021
Study of microbiocenosis of canine dental biofilms.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Canine Periodontal Disease in an Urban Clinical Setting and Its Relationship with Host Factors and the Subgingival Bacterial Profile in Ecuador.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Assessment of periodontitis vaccine using three different bacterial outer membrane vesicles in canine model.mSphere · 2025Article
- Comparison of Oral Microbial Composition and Determinants Encoding Antimicrobial Resistance in Dogs and Their Owners.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Microbial Complexity of Oral Cavity of Healthy Dogs Identified by Mass Spectrometry and Next-Generation Sequencing.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Influence of Gallic Acid-Containing Mouth Spray on Dental Health and Oral Microbiota of Healthy Dogs: A Pilot Study.Veterinary sciences · 2023Article
- Isolation of Oral Bacteria, Measurement of the C-Reactive Protein, and Blood Clinical Parameters in Dogs with Oral Tumor.Veterinary medicine international · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dental biofilm is a complex microbial community influenced by many exogenous and endogenous factors. Despite long-term studies, its bacterial composition is still not clearly understood. While most of the research on dental biofilms was conducted in humans, much less information is available from companion animals. In this study, we analyzed the composition of canine dental biofilms using both standard cultivation on solid media and amplicon sequencing, and compared the two approaches. The 16S rRNA gene sequences were used to define the bacterial community of canine dental biofilm with both, culture-dependent and culture-independent methods. After DNA extraction from each sample, the V3-V4 region of the 16S rRNA gene was amplified and sequenced via Illumina MiSeq platform. Isolated bacteria were identified using universal primers and Sanger sequencing. Representatives of 18 bacterial genera belonging to 5 phyla were isolated from solid media. Amplicon sequencing largely expanded this information identifying in total 284 operational taxonomic units belonging to 10 bacterial phyla. Amplicon sequencing revealed much higher diversity of bacteria in the canine dental biofilms, when compared to standard cultivation approach. In contrast, cultured representatives of several bacterial families were not identified by amplicon sequencing.
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.