ArticleTropical animal health and production2022
Standardization of loop-mediated isothermal amplification for detection of D. nodosus and F. necrophorum causing footrot in sheep and goats.
Article in Tropical animal health and production, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) was standardized for rapid detection of Dichelobacter nodosus and Fusobacterium necrophorum. A total of 250 foot swabs were screened from sheep (200) and goats (50) from different districts of Rayalaseema, viz., Chittoor, Nellore, Kadapa, and Anantapur. Out of 250 samples 75 (30.0%) and 85 (34.0%) were positive for D. nodosus and F. necrophorum, respectively. All the 250 samples were screened individually for both the organisms by LAMP. Among them, 104 (41.6%) were found to be positive for D. nodosus and 120 (48.0%) were positive for F. necrophorum. The efficacy of LAMP in terms of sample DNA detection limit was compared with the PCR by using standard dilutions of DNA extracted from D. nodosus and F. necrophorum cultures. The detection limit was found to be higher than PCR for both the organisms. The sensitivity of LAMP is compared with PCR by targeting 16S rRNA gene of D. nodosus and lktA gene of F. necrophorum. In case of D. nodosus, out of 250 samples, 75 (30.0%) were positive by PCR and 104 (41.6%) were positive by LAMP. Among 250 samples, 85 (34.0%) were positive by PCR and 120 (48.0%) were positive by LAMP in case of F. necrophorum. The LAMP was found to be more sensitive than PCR in detecting the organisms with high statistical significance.
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.