Evidence map›Paper›PMID 8968903›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology1997

Isolation of catalase-negative Listeria monocytogenes strains from listeriosis patients and their rapid identification by anti-p60 antibodies and/or PCR.

A Bubert, J Riebe, N Schnitzler, A Schönberg, W Goebel, P Schubert

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 1997. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Genomic and Phenotypic Diversity ofInfection and drug resistance · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

A BubertLehrstuhl für Mikrobiologie, Theodor-Boveri-Institut für Biowissenschaften, Universität Würzburg, Germany. bubert@biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de
J Riebe
N Schnitzler
A Schönberg
W Goebel
P Schubert
University of Würzburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Two catalase-negative Listeria monocytogenes serovar 1/2b strains were isolated from listeriosis patients in 1995 in Germany. The infections appeared in individuals from different cities at different seasons and were caused by L. monocytogenes strains of different clonal types. In particular, the catalase reaction of one strain isolated from blood was consistently negative, whereas this reaction was only reversibly blocked when the strain was freshly isolated from ascitic fluid. After subculturing, the catalase-positive reaction was restored. Initially, identification of these isolates was difficult to achieve not only because of the lack of a catalase reaction, which generally distinguishes L. monocytogenes from other morphologically similar pathogenic gram-positive bacteria, but also because other routinely used biochemical tests such as CAMP and the commercial API test gave unclear results. However, rapid and unequivocal identification of these strains was possible by analyzing secretions of the p60 protein in culture supernatants by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay or Western blot (immunoblot) analysis with our recently developed Listeria- and L. monocytogenes-specific anti-p60 antibodies. Additionally, the identifications were confirmed by Listeria- and L. monocytogenes-specific PCR analyses with primers derived from the iap, hly, and prfA genes. Immunoanalyses also allowed for the differentiation of these two strains, whereas no differentiation was possible by PCR when the internal, variable repetitive iap gene portion was analyzed. However, size variations of the PCR products comprising these gene portions which were obtained from a number of L. monocytogenes strains belonging to the same serotypes indicated that this type of PCR is not only useful for specific identifications but may be used in parallel as an additional marker for epidemiological studies. In conclusion, the data suggest that catalase production should not be taken as a strict criterion for the identification of listeriae. Furthermore, at least the infection caused by the stably catalase-negative strain supports the notion that catalase does not seem to be necessary for the intracellular growth of L. monocytogenes.

Indexed as

AgedAntibodies, BacterialBacterial ProteinsCatalaseGenes, BacterialHumansListeria monocytogenesListeriosisMalePolymerase Chain Reaction60 kDa protein, Listeria monocytogenesAntibodies, BacterialBacterial ProteinsCatalase

Identifiers

PMID8968903
PMCPMC229534
OpenAlexW1807405403

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.