Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35689185›Full record

ArticleBMC microbiology2022

Real-time PCR using atpE, conventional PCR targeting different regions of difference, and flow cytometry for confirmation of Mycobacterium bovis in buffaloes and cattle from the Delta area of Egypt.

Mohamed Sabry Abd Elraheam Elsayed, Ahmed Salah, Ahmed Abd Elbadee, Tamer Roshdy

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Genetic diversity and antibiotic resistance ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mohamed Sabry Abd Elraheam ElsayedDepartment of Bacteriology, Mycology, and Immunology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Sadat City, Sadat City, Menoufia, 32897, Egypt. mohamed.sabry@vet.usc.edu.eg.
Ahmed SalahDepartment of Molecular Biology, Genetic Engineering, and Biotechnology Research Institute, University of Sadat City, Sadat City, Menoufia, Egypt.
Ahmed Abd ElbadeeAnimal Biotechnology Department, Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology Research Institute, University of Sadat City, Sadat City, Menoufia, Egypt.
Tamer RoshdyDepartment of Molecular Biology, Genetic Engineering, and Biotechnology Research Institute, University of Sadat City, Sadat City, Menoufia, Egypt.
University of Sadat City · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMycobacterium bovis notoriously causes detrimental infections in bovines and humans. In this study, 1500 buffaloes and 2200 cattle were tested by single intradermal comparative cervical tuberculin test and compared with the detection rates of M. bovis isolation, real-time and simplex PCR, and flow Cytometry.

resultsThe tuberculin test is the reference test in Egypt, the positive rate was 54/3700 (1.5%) composed of 18/1500 (1.2%) buffaloes and 36/2200 (1.6%) cattle which were mandatorily slaughtered under the Egyptian legislation, after postmortem examination the non-visible-lesion proportion was 39/54 (72.2%) which surpassed the visible-lesion rate 15/54 (27.8%) with (p < 0.0001). The samples from each case were pooled into one sample representing the case, and the isolation rate of M. bovis was 25/54 (46.3%). Real-time PCR using atpE was positive for mycobacteria on the genus level in 18/18 (100%) and 5/5 (100%) of tissue samples and isolates, respectively; simplex PCR detected M. bovis in 44/54 (81.5%) and 25/25 (100%) of tissue samples and isolates, respectively. Flow Cytometry evaluation of the CD4

conclusionsThe skin test suffers from interference from non-tuberculous mycobacteria able to cause false-positive reactions in cattle and other species. Real-time PCR using atpE, conventional PCR targeting RDs, and flow Cytometry are rapid and accurate methods that correlate with the isolation and can be promising for detection and confirmation of infected live and slaughtered cases.

Indexed as

Mycobacterium bovisTuberculosis, BovineAnimalsBuffaloesCattleEgyptFlow CytometryReal-Time Polymerase Chain ReactionTuberculinTuberculinCattle and buffaloConventional PCRFlow cytometryMycobacterium bovisReal-time PCR atpE

Identifiers

PMID35689185
PMCPMC9188198
OpenAlexW4282943016

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.