↓ Skip to main content

Evaluation of six decontamination procedures for isolation of Mycobacterium avium complex from avian feces

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluation of six decontamination procedures for isolation of Mycobacterium avium complex from avian feces
Published in
PLOS ONE, August 2018
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0202034
Pubmed ID
Authors

Abdul Sattar, Zunita Zakaria, Jalila Abu, Saleha A. Aziz, Rojas-Ponce Gabriel

Abstract

Culture is considered the gold standard for definitive diagnosis of mycobacterial infections. However, consensus about the most suitable culture procedure for isolation of nontuberculous mycobacteria is lacking. The study compared the recoveries of mycobacteria after decontamination of spiked and fresh avian feces with 4% sodium hydroxide (NaOH), 12% sulfuric acid (H2SO4), or 1% cetylperidinium chloride (CPC), with and without mixture of three antibiotics, namely vancomycin (VAN, 100 μg/ml), nalidixic acid (NAL, 100 μg/ml), and amphotericin B (AMB, 100 μg/ml). The antibiotic mixture was referred to as VNA. Decontamination procedures were evaluated using two (n = 2) avian fecal samples spiked with 106, 104, and 102 CFU/ml of Mycobacterium avium subsp. avium (ATCC 15769) and fresh avian feces (n = 42). M. avium subsp. avium was detected on the culture media from spiked samples (106 and 104 CFU/ml) decontaminated with NaOH, NaOH-VNA, H2SO4, and H2SO4 -VNA for 2-6 weeks. These bacteria were detected in 2-4 weeks when using CPC and CPC-VNA. M. avium subsp. avium cannot be isolated on culture media from spiked samples (102 CFU/ml) decontaminated with any decontaminating agent. Two mycobacterial isolates, namely, Mycobacterium terrae and M. engbaekii, were isolated from field samples decontaminated with NaOH and CPC-VNA. With regard to the contamination rate, the use of CPC-VNA showed lower contamination rates (5.5% and 19.0%) from spiked and field samples than those of the other methods (NaOH: 22.2% and 59.5%, NaOH-VNA: 16.7% and 21.4%, H2SO4: 11.1% and 40.5%, H2SO4-VNA: 5.5% and 21.4%, and CPC: 66.7% and 50%). In conclusion, the decontamination of fecal samples following a two-step procedure with 1% CPC and VNA can ensure high recovery rate of many mycobacteria with the lowest contamination in cultures.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 17%
Student > Master 5 14%
Professor 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 12 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 17%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 3 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 6%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 16 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 August 2018.
All research outputs
#20,529,980
of 23,099,576 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#176,168
of 197,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#289,023
of 331,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,041
of 3,280 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,099,576 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 197,125 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,118 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,280 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.