Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34843579›Full record

ArticlePLoS pathogens2021

Inferring Mycobacterium bovis transmission between cattle and badgers using isolates from the Randomised Badger Culling Trial.

Andries J van Tonder, Mark J Thornton, Andrew J K Conlan, Keith A Jolley, Lee Goolding, Andrew P Mitchell, James Dale, Eleftheria Palkopoulou, Philip J Hogarth, R Glyn Hewinson and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS pathogens, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Enhanced analysis of the genomic diversity ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Article
  7. Whole-Genome sequencing in routineMicrobial genomics · 2024
    Article
  8. Genomic comparison betweenFrontiers in veterinary science · 2024
    Article
  9. Whole genome sequencing improves the discrimination betweenOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2023
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Genomic epidemiology ofMicrobial genomics · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. 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

12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Andries J van TonderDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4380-5250
Mark J ThorntonDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8130-9709
Andrew J K ConlanDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2593-6353
Keith A JolleyDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0751-0287
Lee GooldingAnimal and Plant Health Agency, New Haw, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9815-7425
Andrew P MitchellAnimal and Plant Health Agency, New Haw, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4059-0362
James DaleAnimal and Plant Health Agency, New Haw, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-2783-3905
Eleftheria PalkopoulouAnimal and Plant Health Agency, New Haw, United Kingdom.
Philip J HogarthAnimal and Plant Health Agency, New Haw, United Kingdom.
R Glyn HewinsonIBERS, Aberystwyth University, Ceredigion, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-5517-4281
James L N WoodDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0258-3188
Julian ParkhillDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7069-5958
Animal and Plant Health Agency · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBAberystwyth University · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/N00468X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mycobacterium bovis (M. bovis) is a causative agent of bovine tuberculosis, a significant source of morbidity and mortality in the global cattle industry. The Randomised Badger Culling Trial was a field experiment carried out between 1998 and 2005 in the South West of England. As part of this trial, M. bovis isolates were collected from contemporaneous and overlapping populations of badgers and cattle within ten defined trial areas. We combined whole genome sequences from 1,442 isolates with location and cattle movement data, identifying transmission clusters and inferred rates and routes of transmission of M. bovis. Most trial areas contained a single transmission cluster that had been established shortly before sampling, often contemporaneous with the expansion of bovine tuberculosis in the 1980s. The estimated rate of transmission from badger to cattle was approximately two times higher than from cattle to badger, and the rate of within-species transmission considerably exceeded these for both species. We identified long distance transmission events linked to cattle movement, recurrence of herd breakdown by infection within the same transmission clusters and superspreader events driven by cattle but not badgers. Overall, our data suggests that the transmission clusters in different parts of South West England that are still evident today were established by long-distance seeding events involving cattle movement, not by recrudescence from a long-established wildlife reservoir. Clusters are maintained primarily by within-species transmission, with less frequent spill-over both from badger to cattle and cattle to badger.

Indexed as

AnimalsCattleClinical Trials, Veterinary as TopicDisease ReservoirsEnglandMustelidaeMycobacterium bovisRandom AllocationTuberculosis, Bovine

Identifiers

PMID34843579
PMCPMC8659364
OpenAlexW3214937045

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.