ArticleParasitology research2022
Effect of substrate on the proliferation of Myxobolus cerebralis in the mitochondrial lineages of the Tubifex tubifex host.
Article in Parasitology research, 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, 3 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
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The study goal was to examine the effects of sand and mud on the propagation of Myxobolus cerebralis, the whirling disease agent, in four mitochondrial 16S ribosomal DNA lineages (I, III, V, VI) of its oligochaete host, Tubifex tubifex (Tt). In all the lineage groups held continuously in either substrate (non-shifted) or transferred from sand to mud (shifted), substrate influenced parasite proliferation only in lineage III. Sporogenesis and release of triactinomyxon spores (TAMs) were more prevalent in lineage III Tt in mud compared to sand. Low-infection prevalence and lack of parasite development in lineage I is associated with the greater number of resistant worms and were not affected by substrate type. Substrate did not impact Tt from lineages V and VI that failed to develop any parasite stages in either substrate even after shifting from sand to mud. The relationship between the microbial community in the substrate and parasite proliferation in lineage III was described but not analyzed due to small sample size. Substrate-associated bacteria were hypothesized as essential dietary source for the oligochaete host feeding selectively on fine (mud)-microflora. Progeny was produced by all lineage groups shifted to mud with disparate survival profiles in lineage V and VI and high mortalities in lineage III. Our study demonstrates that substrate type can alter parasite proliferation in lineage III. Conversely, parasite development and infectivity were not altered in lineage V and VI that are refractory to the parasite nor among the more resistant phenotypes (I), regardless of substrate type.
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.