Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 325

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Genotyping using whole-genome sequencing is a realistic alternative to surveillance based on phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing

Zankari, E., Hasman, H., Kaas, R. S., Seyfarth, A. M., Agerso, Y., Lund, O., Larsen, M. V., Aarestrup, F. M.·2013·Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of bacterial isolates is essential for clinical diagnosis, to detect emerging problems and to guide empirical treatment. Current phenotypic procedures are sometimes associated with mistakes and may require further genetic testing. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) may soon be within reach even for routine surveillance and clinical diagnostics. The aim of this study was to evaluate WGS as a routine tool for surveillance of antimicrobial resistance compared with current phenotypic procedures. METHODS: Antimicrobial susceptibility tests were performed on 200 isolates originating from Danish pigs, covering four bacterial species. Genomic DNA was purified from all isolates and sequenced as paired-end reads on the Illumina platform. The web servers ResFinder and MLST (www.genomicepidemiology.org) were used to identify acquired antimicrobial resistance genes and MLST types (where MLST stands for multilocus sequence typing). ResFinder results were compared with phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing results using EUCAST epidemiological cut-off values and MLST types. RESULTS: A total of 3051 different phenotypic tests were performed; 482 led to the categorizing of isolates as resistant and 2569 as susceptible. Seven cases of disagreement between tested and predicted susceptibility were observed, six of which were related to spectinomycin resistance in Escherichia coli. Correlation between MLST type and resistance profiles was only observed in Salmonella Typhimurium, where isolates belonging to sequence type (ST) 34 were more resistant than ST19 isolates. CONCLUSIONS: High concordance (99.74%) between phenotypic and predicted antimicrobial susceptibility was observed. Thus, antimicrobial resistance testing based on WGS is an alternative to conventional phenotypic methods.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jac/dks496

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 325

Metadata

Authors
Zankari, E., Hasman, H., Kaas, R. S., Seyfarth, A. M., Agerso, Y., Lund, O., Larsen, M. V., & Aarestrup, F. M.
Venue
Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
Published
2012-12-11
Volume
68
Issue
4
Pages
771-777
ISSN
  • 0305-7453 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2091
OpenAlex
W2128908920
Cited by
325
References
2
FWCI
5.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Genotyping using whole-genome sequencing is a realistic alternative to surveillance based on phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jac/dks496
The paper
Zankari, E., Hasman, H., Kaas, R. S., Seyfarth, A. M., Agerso, Y., Lund, O., Larsen, M. V., & Aarestrup, F. M. (2013). Genotyping using whole-genome sequencing is a realistic alternative to surveillance based on phenotypic antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dks496

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.