The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Genetic Diversity among Enterococcus faecalis
Open accessAbstract
Enterococcus faecalis, a ubiquitous member of mammalian gastrointestinal flora, is a leading cause of nosocomial infections and a growing public health concern. The enterococci responsible for these infections are often resistant to multiple antibiotics and have become notorious for their ability to acquire and disseminate antibiotic resistances. In the current study, we examined genetic relationships among 106 strains of E. faecalis isolated over the past 100 years, including strains identified for their diversity and used historically for serotyping, strains that have been adapted for laboratory use, and isolates from previously described E. faecalis infection outbreaks. This collection also includes isolates first characterized as having novel plasmids, virulence traits, antibiotic resistances, and pathogenicity island (PAI) components. We evaluated variation in factors contributing to pathogenicity, including toxin production, antibiotic resistance, polymorphism in the capsule (cps) operon, pathogenicity island (PAI) gene content, and other accessory factors. This information was correlated with multi-locus sequence typing (MLST) data, which was used to define genetic lineages. Our findings show that virulence and antibiotic resistance traits can be found within many diverse lineages of E. faecalis. However, lineages have emerged that have caused infection outbreaks globally, in which several new antibiotic resistances have entered the species, and in which virulence traits have converged. Comparing genomic hybridization profiles, using a microarray, of strains identified by MLST as spanning the diversity of the species, allowed us to identify the core E. faecalis genome as consisting of an estimated 2057 unique genes.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Antibiotic resistance in food lactic acid bacteria—a review
Mathur, S., & Singh, R. (2005) · International Journal of Food Microbiology · doi:10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2005.03.008 · Cited by 754
Cited by
Antimicrobial Resistance in ESKAPE Pathogens
De Oliveira, D. M. P., Forde, B. M., Kidd, T. J., Harris, P. N. A., Schembri, M. A., Beatson, S. A., Paterson, D. L., & Walker, M. J. (2020) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.00181-19 · Cited by 2,078
Enterococci as probiotics and their implications in food safety
Franz, C. M. A. P., Huch, M., Abriouel, H., Holzapfel, W., & Gálvez, A. (2011) · International Journal of Food Microbiology · doi:10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2011.08.014 · Cited by 788
Fiore, E., Van Tyne, D., & Gilmore, M. S. (2019) · Microbiology Spectrum · doi:10.1128/microbiolspec.gpp3-0053-2018 · Cited by 503
Self-citationMore Is Better: Selecting for Broad Host Range Bacteriophages
Ross, A., Ward, S., & Hyman, P. (2016) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2016.01352 · Cited by 367
Manson, J. M., Hancock, L. E., & Gilmore, M. S. (2010) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1000139107 · Cited by 192
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- McBride, S. M., Fischetti, V. A., LeBlanc, D. J., Moellering, R. C., & Gilmore, M. S.
- Venue
- PLoS ONE
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2007-07-04
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- e582
- ISSN
- 1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2108954741
- Cited by
- 330
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 8.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Genetic Diversity among Enterococcus faecalis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0000582
- The paper
- McBride, S. M., Fischetti, V. A., LeBlanc, D. J., Moellering, R. C., & Gilmore, M. S. (2007). Genetic Diversity among Enterococcus faecalis. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000582
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.