Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37637116›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in microbiology2023

Methods for detection and identification of beer-spoilage microbes.

Ryanne C Oldham, Michael A Held

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in microbiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ryanne C OldhamDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Ohio University, Athens, OH, United States.
Michael A HeldDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Ohio University, Athens, OH, United States.
Ohio University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is critical that breweries of all sizes routinely monitor the microbiome of their process to limit financial losses due to microbial contamination. Contamination by beer-spoiling microbes (BSMs) at any point during the brewing process may lead to significant losses for breweries if gone undetected and allowed to spread. Testing and detection of BSMs must be routine and rapid, and because even small breweries need the capability of BSM detection and identification, the method also needs to be affordable. Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) are responsible for most spoilage incidents, many of which have been shown to enter the viable but nonculturable (VBNC) state under conditions present in beer such as cold or oxidative stress. These bacteria are invisible to traditional methods of detection using selective media. This article describes several methods of BSM detection and identification that may be useful in the majority of craft breweries. While there are several genomic methods that meet some or many qualifications of being useful in craft breweries, real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) currently best meets the desired method characteristics and holds the most utility in this industry, specifically SYBR Green qPCR. qPCR is a targeted method of detection and identification of microbes that is affordable, rapid, specific, sensitive, quantitative, and reliable, and when paired with valid DNA extraction techniques can be used to detect BSMs, including those in the VBNC state.

Indexed as

BSMDNA extractionLABprimerqPCRVBNC

Identifiers

PMID37637116
PMCPMC10448528
OpenAlexW4385720155

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.