ArticleBMC research notes2024
Using clotted, pelleted blood samples for direct molecular detection of Bartonella spp. in small mammal wildlife surveillance studies.
Article in BMC research notes, 2024. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveBartonella are emerging bacterial zoonotic pathogens. Utilization of clotted blood samples for surveillance of these bacteria in wildlife has begun to supersede the use of tissues; however, the efficacy of these samples has not been fully investigated. Our objective was to compare the efficacy of spleen and blood samples for DNA extraction and direct detection of Bartonella spp. via qPCR. In addition, we present a protocol for improved DNA extraction from clotted, pelleted (i.e., centrifuged) blood samples obtained from wild small mammals.
resultsDNA concentrations from kit-extracted blood clot samples were low and A260/A280 absorbance ratios indicated high impurity. Kit-based DNA extraction of spleen samples was efficient and produced ample DNA concentrations of good quality. We developed an in-house extraction method for the blood clots which resulted in apposite DNA quality when compared to spleen samples extracted via MagMAX DNA Ultra 2.0 kit. We detected Bartonella in 9/30 (30.0%) kit-extracted spleen DNA samples and 11/30 (36.7%) in-house-extracted blood clot samples using PCR. Our results suggest that kit-based methods may be less suitable for DNA extraction from blood clots, and that blood clot samples may be superior to tissues for Bartonella detection.
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.