Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42137806›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2026

Presence of antimicrobial resistance genes in biofilms from swine drinking water pipes before and after treatment with peracetic acid.

Gabrielle E Doughan, Becca K Walthart, Cora E Schau, Kristin J Skoland, Kathy T Y Mou, Justin T Brown, Jessica L Bonnema, Paul J Plummer, Danyang Zhang, Ganwu Li and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors.

Gabrielle E DoughanDepartment of Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Swine Medicine Education Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States.
Becca K WalthartDepartment of Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Swine Medicine Education Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States.
Cora E SchauDepartment of Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Swine Medicine Education Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States.
Kristin J SkolandDepartment of Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Swine Medicine Education Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States.
Kathy T Y MouDepartment of Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States.
Justin T BrownDepartment of Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Swine Medicine Education Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States.
Jessica L BonnemaDepartment of Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Swine Medicine Education Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States.
Paul J PlummerCollege of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, United States.
Danyang ZhangDepartment of Statistics, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States.
Ganwu LiDepartment of Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States.
Locke A KarrikerDepartment of Veterinary Diagnostic and Production Animal Medicine, Swine Medicine Education Center, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biofilms can be problematic to swine drinking water systems as they can harbor pathogens, decrease water quality, and may contribute to antimicrobial treatment failure. Water-administered antimicrobials are used for disease treatment in swine populations, yet, little is known about water line ecology and the impact it can have on antimicrobial resistance and stewardship. Water line cleaning and disinfection may aid in removal of water line biofilms, improve swine health, and antimicrobial stewardship. Water line samples were collected pre-treatment (0), 24 h post-treatment with 0.78% CID 2000 Pro (peracetic acid) (1), and 3, 5, 7, 14, 21, 42, 56, and 77-days post-treatment from six wean-to-finish swine farms in Iowa, USA. Biofilm was aseptically extracted from the interior of the water line pipe (

Indexed as

AMRARGSbiofilmintegron genesperacetic acidswinewater lines

Identifiers

PMID42137806
PMCPMC13168167

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.