These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

111 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 18776096)

  • 1. Comparison of five culture methods for Salmonella isolation from swine fecal samples of known infection status.
    Love BC; Rostagno MH
    J Vet Diagn Invest; 2008 Sep; 20(5):620-4. PubMed ID: 18776096
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Evaluation of the 1-2 test for detecting Salmonella in swine feces.
    Erdman MM; Harris DL
    J Food Prot; 2003 Mar; 66(3):518-21. PubMed ID: 12636313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. The effect of fecal sample weight on detection of Salmonella enterica in swine feces.
    Funk JA; Davies PR; Nichols MA
    J Vet Diagn Invest; 2000 Sep; 12(5):412-8. PubMed ID: 11021427
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Improved culture methods for isolation of Salmonella organisms from swine feces.
    Hoorfar J; Mortensen AV
    Am J Vet Res; 2000 Nov; 61(11):1426-9. PubMed ID: 11108192
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Comparison of cultivation and PCR-hybridization for detection of Salmonella in porcine fecal and water samples.
    Feder I; Nietfeld JC; Galland J; Yeary T; Sargeant JM; Oberst R; Tamplin ML; Luchansky JB
    J Clin Microbiol; 2001 Jul; 39(7):2477-84. PubMed ID: 11427557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Comparison of fecal culture and Danish Mix-ELISA for determination of Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica prevalence in growing swine.
    Funk JA; Harris IT; Davies PR
    Vet Microbiol; 2005 Apr; 107(1-2):115-26. PubMed ID: 15795083
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Culture methods differ on the isolation of Salmonella enterica serotypes from naturally contaminated swine fecal samples.
    Rostagno MH; Gailey JK; Hurd HS; Mckean JD; Leite RC
    J Vet Diagn Invest; 2005 Jan; 17(1):80-3. PubMed ID: 15690959
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Enhanced culture techniques for the detection of Salmonella.
    Davies RH; Bedford S; Shankster S
    Vet Rec; 2001 Apr; 148(17):539-40. PubMed ID: 11354648
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Recovery of Salmonella enterica from seropositive finishing pig herds.
    Lo Fo Wong DM; Dahl J; van der Wolf PJ; Wingstrand A; Leontides L; von Altrock A
    Vet Microbiol; 2003 Dec; 97(3-4):201-14. PubMed ID: 14654291
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Comparison of methods for isolating Salmonella bacteria from faeces of naturally infected pigs.
    Davies PR; Turkson PK; Funk JA; Nichols MA; Ladely SR; Fedorka-Cray PJ
    J Appl Microbiol; 2000 Jul; 89(1):169-77. PubMed ID: 10945794
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Comparison of bacterial enriched-broth culture, enzyme linked immunosorbent assay, and broth culture-polymerase chain reaction techniques for identifying asymptomatic infections with Salmonella in swine.
    Sibley J; Yue B; Huang F; Harding J; Kingdon J; Chirino-Trejo M; Appleyard GD
    Can J Vet Res; 2003 Jul; 67(3):219-24. PubMed ID: 12889729
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Salmonella enterica I 4,[5],12:i:- Associated with Lesions Typical of Swine Enteric Salmonellosis.
    Arruda BL; Burrough ER; Schwartz KJ
    Emerg Infect Dis; 2019 Jul; 25(7):1377-1379. PubMed ID: 31211677
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Herd-level risk factors for Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica in U.S. market pigs.
    Bahnson PB; Fedorka-Cray PJ; Ladely SR; Mateus-Pinilla NE
    Prev Vet Med; 2006 Oct; 76(3-4):249-62. PubMed ID: 16828183
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Estimation of the diagnostic accuracy of the invA-gene-based PCR technique and a bacteriological culture for the detection of Salmonella spp. in caecal content from slaughtered pigs using Bayesian analysis.
    Mainar-Jaime RC; Atashparvar N; Chirino-Trejo M
    Zoonoses Public Health; 2008; 55(2):112-8. PubMed ID: 18234030
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Sub-iliac lymph nodes at slaughter lack ability to predict Salmonella enterica prevalence for swine farms.
    Wang B; Wesley IV; McKean JD; O'Connor AM
    Foodborne Pathog Dis; 2010 Jul; 7(7):795-800. PubMed ID: 20187754
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Importance of pre-enrichment media for isolation of Salmonella spp. from swine and poultry.
    Hoorfar J; Baggesen DL
    FEMS Microbiol Lett; 1998 Dec; 169(1):125-30. PubMed ID: 9851043
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Comparison of bacterial culture and real-time PCR for the detection of Salmonella in grow-finish pigs in Western Canada using a Bayesian approach.
    Wilkins W; Waldner C; Rajić A; McFall M; Muckle A; Mainar-Jaime RC
    Zoonoses Public Health; 2010 Nov; 57 Suppl 1():115-20. PubMed ID: 21083825
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Toward standardization of diagnostic PCR testing of fecal samples: lessons from the detection of salmonellae in pigs.
    Malorny B; Hoorfar J
    J Clin Microbiol; 2005 Jul; 43(7):3033-7. PubMed ID: 16000411
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Sensitivity and specificity of different methods for the isolation of Salmonella from pigs.
    Bager F; Petersen J
    Acta Vet Scand; 1991; 32(4):473-81. PubMed ID: 1818506
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparison of conventional culture methods and two commercial enzyme immunoassays for detection of Salmonella in porcine fecal samples and cecal contents.
    Wegener HC; Baggesen DL
    J Vet Diagn Invest; 1997 Oct; 9(4):352-6. PubMed ID: 9376422
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.