↓ Skip to main content

Frequency, characterization and genotypic analysis of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli in beef slaughterhouses of Argentina

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Argentina de Microbiología, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 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
Frequency, characterization and genotypic analysis of Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli in beef slaughterhouses of Argentina
Published in
Revista Argentina de Microbiología, June 2018
DOI 10.1016/j.ram.2018.03.005
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mariana Cap, Claudia C Carbonari, Beatriz A D'Astek, Gisela Zolezzi, Natalia Deza, Martin P Palladino, Marcelo Masana, Isabel Chinen, Marta Rivas

Abstract

The objectives of this study were: (1) to estimate STEC frequency in hide and carcass samples taken from beef slaughterhouses supplying the domestic market in Argentina, (2) to establish the pheno-genotypic characteristics of STEC and non-toxigenic Escherichia coli of serogroups O26, O45, O103, O121, O111, O145 or O157 isolated from the analyzed samples and, (3) to study their clonal relatedness. Sixty hides and 60 carcasses were analyzed. At the screening step, 48% of hide and 80% of carcass samples tested positive for the stx gene by endpoint PCR. The STEC isolation rate was 5% for hides and 8% for carcasses. The isolation rate of STEC-positive for O26, O45, O103, O111, O145 or O157 serogroups was 0% for hides and 2% for carcasses. With the purpose of studying the clonal relatedness of isolates, macrorestriction fragment analysis by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis was performed. The results indicated cross-contamination between hides and between carcasses of animals in the same lot and, that the origin of carcass contamination was their own hide, or the hides of other animals in the same lot. The high detection rate at the screening step, especially in carcasses, and the evidence of cross-contamination show the need to apply additional in-plant intervention strategies aimed at preventing carcass contamination.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 18%
Student > Bachelor 4 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 12 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Immunology and Microbiology 4 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 12%
Environmental Science 3 9%
Engineering 2 6%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 11 33%
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 26 June 2018.
All research outputs
#22,767,715
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Revista Argentina de Microbiología
#231
of 327 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#300,180
of 342,290 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Argentina de Microbiología
#4
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 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 327 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 1.7. 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 342,290 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 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.