ArticleJDS communications2025
Use of MALDI-TOF to identify cryopreserved mastitis pathogens collected from 2003 to 2011 that were originally identified using conventional microbiological methods.
Article in JDS communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Evaluation of In Vitro Inhibitory Activity of Extracts of Garlic, Ginger, and Onion AgainstVeterinary sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For decades, conventional microbiological methods have been used to identify bacterial causes of bovine mastitis. Although these methods are relatively accurate for identification of important mastitis pathogens, all diagnostic tests are imperfect, and as testing technologies advance, widespread use of newer technologies may result in differences in the distribution of etiologies that are identified. As a result, historical research using conventional microbiological methods may not be comparable to results of current studies. The objective of this study was to compare agreement between the original identification of mastitis pathogens from cows enrolled in mastitis studies between 2003 and 2011 with identification of the same isolates using MALDI-TOF. Cryopreserved bacterial isolates (n = 308) that had been recovered from quarter milk samples and originally identified using conventional microbiological techniques were used. Bacterial identification was performed using MALDI-TOF. Among all isolates, 277 were able to be identified using MALDI-TOF, and the overall observed levels of agreement were 86% and 64% for identification at the genus level and genus-species level, respectively. The kappa statistic for agreement between methods at the genus level was substantial at 0.80 (95% CI: 0.78, 0.82) but dropped to 0.64 (95% CI: 0.62, 0.66) for agreement at both the genus and species level. For gram-positive isolates, agreement at both the genus level and the genus and species level was substantial. In contrast, for gram-negative isolates, the genus-level agreement was substantial, but agreement at both the genus and species levels was moderate. Our findings suggest substantial agreement between MALDI-TOF and conventional methods for determining genus-level identification, but some discrepancies occur at the species level. These results indicate that historical mastitis research using conventional microbiological methods are comparable at the genus level to current results using MALDI-TOF, but some caution should be applied when making species-level comparisons, especially for gram-negative pathogens.
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.