ArticleOral microbiology and immunology1993
Evaluating two methods for fingerprinting genomes of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans.
Article in Oral microbiology and immunology, 1993. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identification of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans serotypes by multiplex PCR.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2001Article
- Heterogeneity of Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans strains in various human infections and relationships between serotype, genotype, and antimicrobial susceptibility.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2000Article
- Characterization of serologically nontypeable Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans isolates.Journal of clinical microbiology · 1998Article
- Clonal diversity of oral Eikenella corrodens within individual subjects by arbitrarily primed PCR.Journal of clinical microbiology · 1996Article
- Genomic DNA fingerprinting by restriction fragment end labeling.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 1995Article
- Comparison of six typing methods for Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans.Journal of clinical microbiology · 1994Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The arbitrary primer polymerase chain reaction (AP-PCR) and Southern blot restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) were used to genotype the periodontal pathogen A. actinomycetemcomitans. Total genomic DNA from 73 strains was extracted by conventional methods. Three random-sequence 10-base oligonucleotide primers were chosen for AP-PCR. The amplified DNA products were separated electrophoretically in a 1% agarose gel containing ethidium bromide and the banding patterns were compared among different strains. For RFLP analysis, DNA was digested with EcoRI, separated on a 0.8% agarose gel and transferred to a nylon membrane. The membrane was probed with a previously characterized 5.2 kilobases (kb) DNA fragment cloned from A. actinomycetemcomitans strain Y4. The probe was labeled with digoxigenin, and hybridized fragments were detected with anti-digoxigenin antibody. AP-PCR produced 4-10 DNA bands in the 0.5-5 kb regions and distinguished 9, 13 or 17 genotypes, depending on the specific primer used. Southern blot RFLP analysis revealed 12 hybridization patterns consisting of 1 or 2 DNA fragments (2-23 kb). The addition of the Southern blot analysis to the AP-PCR analysis gave rise to a total of 30 DNA profiles among the 73 A. actinomycetemcomitans study strains. The results indicate that both AP-PCR and Southern blot analysis are useful in clonal analysis of A. actinomycetemcomitans.
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.