Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 290

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assigning Escherichia coli strains to phylogenetic groups: multi‐locus sequence typing versus the PCR triplex method

Open access
Gordon, David M., Clermont, Olivier, Tolley, Heather, Denamur, Erick·2008·Environmental Microbiology

Abstract

Summary: It is well recognized that Escherichia coli consists of a number of distinct phylo‐groups and that strains of the different phylo‐groups vary in their ecological niches, life‐history characteristics and propensity to cause disease. Consequently, much can be learnt by assigning a strain of E. coli to one of the recognized phylo‐groups. A triplex PCR‐based method that enables strains of E. coli to be assigned to a phylo‐group using a dichotomous key approach based on the presence or absence of two genes ( chuA and yjaA ) and an anonymous DNA fragment (TSPE4.C2) has been developed. However, the accuracy with which this method assigns strains to their correct phylo‐group has not been adequately evaluated. Consequently, 662 strains of E. coli were characterized using a multi‐locus sequence typing approach. Unsupervised population assignment algorithms were used to assign strains to phylo‐groups based on the multi‐locus sequence typing data. The analyses revealed that 85–90% of E. coli strains can be assigned to a phylo‐group and that 80–85% of the phylo‐group memberships assigned using the Clermont method are correct. However, the accuracy with which strains are assigned to the correct phylo‐group depends on their Clermont genotype. For example, strains yielding a Clermont genotype consistent with phylo‐groups B1 and B2 are assigned correctly 95% of the time. Strains failing to yield any PCR products using the Clermont method are seldom members of phylo‐group A and strains with such a genotype should not be assigned to a phylo‐group.

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 · 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2008.01669.x

Cites

27 of 27 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 27 references

Cited by

See all 290

Metadata

Authors
Gordon, D. M., Clermont, O., Tolley, H., & Denamur, E.
Venue
Environmental Microbiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2008-09-10
Volume
10
Issue
10
Pages
2484-2496
ISSN
  • 1462-2912 (ISSN-L)
  • 1462-2920
OpenAlex
W1899361240
Cited by
290
References
27
FWCI
13.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Assigning Escherichia coli strains to phylogenetic groups: multi‐locus sequence typing versus the PCR triplex method. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2008.01669.x
The paper
Gordon, D. M., Clermont, O., Tolley, H., & Denamur, E. (2008). Assigning Escherichia coli strains to phylogenetic groups: multi‐locus sequence typing versus the PCR triplex method. Environmental Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2008.01669.x

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.