ReviewMolecular biotechnology1996
DNA fingerprinting techniques for microorganisms. A proposal for classification and nomenclature.
Review in Molecular biotechnology, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genomic fingerprints of Escherichia coli strains isolated from surface water in Alborz province, Iran.BMC research notes · 2017Article
- A peptide identification-free, genome sequence-independent shotgun proteomics workflow for strain-level bacterial differentiation.Scientific reports · 2015Article
- Article
- A normalization strategy applied to HiCEP (an AFLP-based expression profiling) analysis: toward the strict alignment of valid fragments across electrophoretic patterns.BMC bioinformatics · 2005Article
- High diversity among environmental Escherichia coli isolates from a bovine feedlot.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2004Article
- Molecular diagnostics of clinically important staphylococci.Folia microbiologica · 2004Review
- Methodologies for the characterization of microbes in industrial environments: a review.Journal of industrial microbiology & biotechnology · 2003Review
- Considerations in evaluation of the applicability of DNA fingerprinting techniques for species differentiation.Journal of clinical microbiology · 1999Article
- Amplified-fragment length polymorphism analysis: the state of an art.Journal of clinical microbiology · 1999Review
- Multicenter study using standardized protocols and reagents for evaluation of reproducibility of PCR-based fingerprinting of Acinetobacter spp.Journal of clinical microbiology · 1997Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A whole array of DNA-fingerprinting techniques, which provide indirect access to DNA sequence polymorphism in order to assess species or clonal identity of bacterial organisms or in order to study bacterial genome composition, have been described during past decades. Nomenclature has been sometimes erroneous and/or confusing, also because of hybrid techniques that combine different approaches. It can be shown that most techniques study the sequence polymorphism of only the chromosome, or only the plasmid(s) or only a gene or gene fragment and that the sequence polymorphism is revealed by AFLP (amplified fragment length polymorphism) or by RFLP (restriction fragment length polymorphism) or by special electrophoresis techniques. Starting from these considerations, some taxonomy of techniques, which enables more appropriate nomenclature, can be developed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
8970167What 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.