Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 947

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Field Guide to Pandemic, Epidemic and Sporadic Clones of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Open access
Monecke, Stefan, Coombs, Geoffrey, Shore, Anna C., Coleman, David C., Akpaka, Patrick, Borg, Michael, Chow, Henry, Ip, Margaret, Jatzwauk, Lutz, Jonas, Daniel, Kadlec, Kristina, Kearns, Angela, Laurent, Frederic, O'Brien, Frances G., Pearson, Julie, Ruppelt, Antje, Schwarz, Stefan, Scicluna, Elizabeth, Slickers, Peter, Tan, Hui-Leen, Weber, Stefan, Ehricht, Ralf·2011·PLoS ONE

Abstract

In recent years, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) have become a truly global challenge. In addition to the long-known healthcare-associated clones, novel strains have also emerged outside of the hospital settings, in the community as well as in livestock. The emergence and spread of virulent clones expressing Panton-Valentine leukocidin (PVL) is an additional cause for concern. In order to provide an overview of pandemic, epidemic and sporadic strains, more than 3,000 clinical and veterinary isolates of MRSA mainly from Germany, the United Kingdom, Ireland, France, Malta, Abu Dhabi, Hong Kong, Australia, Trinidad & Tobago as well as some reference strains from the United States have been genotyped by DNA microarray analysis. This technique allowed the assignment of the MRSA isolates to 34 distinct lineages which can be clearly defined based on non-mobile genes. The results were in accordance with data from multilocus sequence typing. More than 100 different strains were distinguished based on affiliation to these lineages, SCCmec type and the presence or absence of PVL. These strains are described here mainly with regard to clinically relevant antimicrobial resistance- and virulence-associated markers, but also in relation to epidemiology and geographic distribution. The findings of the study show a high level of biodiversity among MRSA, especially among strains harbouring SCCmec IV and V elements. The data also indicate a high rate of genetic recombination in MRSA involving SCC elements, bacteriophages or other mobile genetic elements and large-scale chromosomal replacements.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0017936

Cites

5 of 5 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 5 references

Cited by

See all 947

Metadata

Authors
Monecke, S., Coombs, G., Shore, A. C., Coleman, D. C., Akpaka, P., Borg, M., Chow, H., Ip, M., Jatzwauk, L., Jonas, D., Kadlec, K., Kearns, A., Laurent, F., O'Brien, F. G., Pearson, J., Ruppelt, A., Schwarz, S., Scicluna, E., Slickers, P., Tan, H.-L., Weber, S., & Ehricht, R.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2011-04-06
Volume
6
Issue
4
Pages
e17936
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2054504313
Cited by
947
References
5
FWCI
42.45
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: A Field Guide to Pandemic, Epidemic and Sporadic Clones of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pone.0017936
The paper
Monecke, S., Coombs, G., Shore, A. C., Coleman, D. C., Akpaka, P., Borg, M., Chow, H., Ip, M., Jatzwauk, L., Jonas, D., Kadlec, K., Kearns, A., Laurent, F., O'Brien, F. G., Pearson, J., Ruppelt, A., Schwarz, S., Scicluna, E., Slickers, P., . . . Ehricht, R. (2011). A Field Guide to Pandemic, Epidemic and Sporadic Clones of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0017936

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.