ArticleBMC microbiology2026
The current discordance on Serratia spp. taxonomical diagnosis using proteomics or genomic tools.
Article in BMC 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.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Serratia marcescens complex comprises several closely related species with potentially distinct epidemiological characteristics. Recent descriptions of new species further complicate accurate identification using routine clinical microbiology methods. We aimed to compare the current species-level identification by MALDI-TOF MS with Whole Genome Sequencing (WGS)-based approaches and to assess concordance among different diagnostic genomic tools.
methodsOverall, 107 Serratia bloodstream isolates were analysed. Initial identification was performed by MALDI-TOF MS. WGS data were analysed using: Kraken, PATO (MASH distance-based), ribosomal MLST (rMLST), and GTDB-Tk (ani-rep and classify_wf functions).
resultsMALDI-TOF MS identified S. marcescens as the predominant species (71%). Kraken assigned all isolates to S. marcescens. Phylogeny-based approaches revealed a markedly different distribution. rMLST and GTDB-Tk consistently identified Serratia sarumanii as the most frequent species (36.4% vs. 34.6%), followed by Serratia ureilytica (26.2% vs. 29%) and Serratia nevei (22.4% vs. 21.5%), while S. marcescens represented a minority (5.6% vs. 3.7%). GTDB-Tk showed near-complete concordance with rMLST (95.3%). Also, 38/107 isolates assigned to S. nevei by PATO were reclassified as S. sarumanii by both rMLST and GTDB-Tk. Complete concordance across all methods was observed in only 3.7% of isolates.
conclusionsAt the moment, species-level classification of Serratia bloodstream isolates is highly method-dependent. Routine diagnostic tools tend to underestimate diversity of the S. marcescens complex, whereas phylogeny-based genomic approaches reveal a more diverse population structure dominated by S. sarumanii, S. ureilytica and S. nevei. These findings highlight the need for cautious interpretation and standardized genomic frameworks with updated databases.
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.