Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40743296›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Optimizing ISO standard microbiological techniques for isolating Campylobacter from poultry samples amidst challenges from extended spectrum beta lactamase producing Escherichia coli.

Keya Ghosh, Tahia Ahmed Logno, Tridip Das, Pangkaj Kumar Dhar, Damer Blake, Guillaume Fournie, Fiona Tomley, Richard A Stabler, Burhan Lehri, Paritosh Kumar Biswas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

10 authors.

Keya GhoshDepartment of Microbiology and Veterinary Public Health, Chattogram Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chittagong, Bangladesh.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0443-3124
Tahia Ahmed LognoDepartment of Microbiology and Veterinary Public Health, Chattogram Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chittagong, Bangladesh.
Tridip DasSchool of Agricultural, Environmental and Veterinary Sciences, Faculty of Sciences and Health, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5642-4150
Pangkaj Kumar DharSchool of Agricultural, Environmental and Veterinary Sciences, Faculty of Sciences and Health, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9595-9980
Damer BlakeDepartment of Pathobiology and Population Sciences, Royal Veterinary College, London, United Kingdom.
Guillaume FournieDepartment of Pathobiology and Population Sciences, Royal Veterinary College, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6998-1201
Fiona TomleyDepartment of Pathobiology and Population Sciences, Royal Veterinary College, London, United Kingdom.
Richard A StablerLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2402-6630
Burhan LehriLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Paritosh Kumar BiswasDepartment of Microbiology and Veterinary Public Health, Chattogram Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Chittagong, Bangladesh.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Isolation of zoonotic Campylobacter species has been standardized through the ISO 10272:2017 protocol. However, application of the protocol in a LMIC country failed to isolate Campylobacter due to extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) producing Escherichia coli overgrowth during the Campylobacter selective enrichment phase. The aim of the study was to identify the contaminants and explore ways to mitigate them. A set of 25 non-Campylobacter contaminants isolated from chicken cecal samples grown on modified charcoal-cefoperazone-deoxycholate agar (mCCDA) during Campylobacter isolation were included. All isolates were screened for species identification and the presence of selected ESBL producing genes. Minimum inhibitory concentrations of tazobactam were measured using a microbroth dilution technique. The Campylobacter isolation protocol was then modified to inhibit the contaminants by adding the required tazobactam supplement to Preston broth or to mCCDA. All contaminants were found to be E. coli carrying at least one of the ESBL-producing genes blaTEM, blaCTX or blaSHV. The MIC of tazobactam sodium for ESBL-producing E. coli strains grown in Preston broth was at least 128 mg/L. Preston broth supplemented with tazobactam at 128 mg/L inhibited the growth of ESBL-producing E. coli but did not inhibit the growth of C. jejuni or C. coli. Interestingly, mCCDA plates supplemented with tazobactam at a much lower concentration of 4 mg/L could also prevent growth of ESBL-producing E. coli even without broth enrichment, increasing the efficiency of isolation of Campylobacter. Direct inoculation of cecal materials to mCCDA supplemented with tazobactam at 4 mg/L was recommended as the most cost-effective way to conduct Campylobacter surveillance targeting the cecal matrix instead of directly following ISO 10272:2017 protocol.

Indexed as

beta-LactamasesCampylobacterEscherichia coliPoultryAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsCecumChickensMicrobial Sensitivity TestsTazobactamAnti-Bacterial Agentsbeta-LactamasesTazobactam

Identifiers

PMID40743296
PMCPMC12313064

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.