Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35655189›Full record

ArticleBMC veterinary research2022

Evaluating the potential of third generation metagenomic sequencing for the detection of BRD pathogens and genetic determinants of antimicrobial resistance in chronically ill feedlot cattle.

Claire N Freeman, Emily K Herman, Jennifer Abi Younes, Dana E Ramsay, Nathan Erikson, Paul Stothard, Matthew G Links, Simon J G Otto, Cheryl Waldner

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC veterinary research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Microbiology spectrum · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Recent Role of Microorganisms of thePathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Laboratory tools for the direct detection of bacterial respiratory infections and antimicrobial resistance: a scoping review.Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation : official publication of the American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians, Inc · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Antimicrobial Susceptibility and Resistance Mechanisms inAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Claire N FreemanDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 52 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5B4, Canada.
Emily K HermanDepartment of Agricultural, Food, and Nutritional Science, Faculty of Agricultural, Life, and Environmental Sciences, University of Alberta, 2-31 General Services Building, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2H1, Canada.
Jennifer Abi YounesDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 52 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5B4, Canada.
Dana E RamsayDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 52 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5B4, Canada.
Nathan EriksonDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 52 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5B4, Canada.
Paul StothardDepartment of Agricultural, Food, and Nutritional Science, Faculty of Agricultural, Life, and Environmental Sciences, University of Alberta, 2-31 General Services Building, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2H1, Canada.
Matthew G LinksDepartment of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Saskatchewan, 51 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5A8, Canada.
Simon J G OttoHEAT-AMR (Human-Environment-Animal Transdisciplinary AMR) Research Group, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, 11322 89 Ave NW, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2G7, Canada.
Cheryl WaldnerDepartment of Large Animal Clinical Sciences, Western College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, 52 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK, S7N 5B4, Canada. cheryl.waldner@usask.ca.
University of Saskatchewan · CAUniversity of Alberta · CA

Funding

Beef Cattle Research Council BCRC_POC.04.18
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBovine respiratory disease (BRD) is an important cause of morbidity and mortality and is responsible for most of the injectable antimicrobial use in the feedlot industry. Traditional bacterial culture can be used to diagnose BRD by confirming the presence of causative pathogens and to support antimicrobial selection. However, given that bacterial culture takes up to a week and early intervention is critical for treatment success, culture has limited utility for informing rapid therapeutic decision-making. In contrast, metagenomic sequencing has the potential to quickly resolve all nucleic acid in a sample, including pathogen biomarkers and antimicrobial resistance genes. In particular, third-generation Oxford Nanopore Technology sequencing platforms provide long reads and access to raw sequencing data in real-time as it is produced, thereby reducing the time from sample collection to diagnostic answer. The purpose of this study was to compare the performance of nanopore metagenomic sequencing to traditional culture and sensitivity methods as applied to nasopharyngeal samples from segregated groups of chronically ill feedlot cattle, previously treated with antimicrobials for nonresponsive pneumonia or lameness.

resultsBRD pathogens were isolated from most samples and a variety of different resistance profiles were observed across isolates. The sequencing data indicated the samples were dominated by Moraxella bovoculi, Mannheimia haemolytica, Mycoplasma dispar, and Pasteurella multocida, and included a wide range of antimicrobial resistance genes (ARGs), encoding resistance for up to seven classes of antimicrobials. Genes conferring resistance to beta-lactams were the most commonly detected, while the tetH gene was detected in the most samples overall. Metagenomic sequencing detected the BRD pathogens of interest more often than did culture, but there was limited concordance between phenotypic resistance to antimicrobials and the presence of relevant ARGs.

conclusionsMetagenomic sequencing can reduce the time from sampling to results, detect pathogens missed by bacterial culture, and identify genetically encoded determinants of resistance. Increasing sequencing coverage of target organisms will be an essential component of improving the reliability of this technology, such that it can be better used for the surveillance of pathogens of interest, genetic determinants of resistance, and to inform diagnostic decisions.

Indexed as

Anti-Infective AgentsCattle DiseasesAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCattleChronic DiseaseDrug Resistance, BacterialReproducibility of ResultsAnti-Bacterial AgentsAnti-Infective Agents

Identifiers

PMID35655189
PMCPMC9161498
OpenAlexW4281759029

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.