Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization Time-of-Flight (MALDI-TOF) for Veterinary Bacterial Identification

Introduction

Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) has emerged as a transformative technology in veterinary clinical microbiology, enabling rapid, accurate, and cost-effective identification of bacterial pathogens from diverse animal sources [1, 2]. Unlike traditional phenotypic methods that require 24 to 72 hours for biochemical profiling, MALDI-TOF MS generates species-level identifications within minutes from a single bacterial colony [3]. The technology relies on the detection of highly abundant ribosomal proteins and other conserved cellular proteins, producing a characteristic mass spectrum that serves as a proteomic fingerprint for each bacterial species [4, 5]. This article provides an exhaustive review of the biophysical principles, workflow, database construction, diagnostic performance, and clinical applications of MALDI-TOF MS specifically in veterinary contexts, drawing exclusively on peer-reviewed literature from the provided corpus.

Biophysical Principles of MALDI-TOF MS

MALDI-TOF MS operates on the principle of soft ionization coupled with time-of-flight mass analysis. A bacterial sample, typically a single colony, is applied to a target plate and overlaid with a chemical matrix solution, most commonly alpha-cyano-4-hydroxycinnamic acid (CHCA) in a solvent mixture of acetonitrile, water, and trifluoroacetic acid [4]. Upon drying, the matrix co-crystallizes with the bacterial proteins. A pulsed nitrogen laser (337 nm wavelength) irradiates the sample, causing the matrix to absorb energy and undergo rapid desorption and ionization [4]. The matrix molecules transfer protons to the bacterial proteins, generating predominantly singly charged ions [4]. These ions are accelerated in an electric field and travel through a field-free flight tube under high vacuum. The time-of-flight (TOF) is proportional to the square root of the mass-to-charge ratio (m/z), with smaller ions reaching the detector earlier than larger ions [4]. The resulting mass spectrum, typically acquired in the range of 2,000 to 20,000 Da, predominantly reflects ribosomal proteins, which are highly conserved, abundant, and constitutively expressed across growth conditions [5, 3].

Workflow for Veterinary Bacterial Identification

The standard MALDI-TOF MS workflow for bacterial identification involves several discrete steps: sample preparation, spectral acquisition, database matching, and result interpretation [3, 30].

Sample Preparation

For routine identification, a single bacterial colony (1 to 10 micrograms of biomass) is directly spotted onto a polished steel target plate [3]. The spot is overlaid with 1 microliter of matrix solution and allowed to dry. For gram-positive bacteria, yeasts, or organisms with robust cell walls, an on-plate formic acid extraction step is recommended: 1 microliter of 70% formic acid is applied to the colony and dried before matrix addition [3]. This step enhances protein extraction and improves spectral quality [3]. For samples with low biomass or complex matrices, such as blood cultures or milk, a more extensive extraction protocol using ethanol and formic acid may be employed [6, 7].

Spectral Acquisition and Processing

The target plate is inserted into the mass spectrometer, and spectra are acquired in linear positive ion mode [4]. Typically, 200 to 500 laser shots are accumulated per spectrum from multiple positions within the sample spot [4]. Raw spectra undergo baseline subtraction, smoothing, and peak detection algorithms to generate a list of m/z values and corresponding intensities [4]. Quality control criteria include minimum peak number, signal-to-noise ratio, and mass calibration accuracy using a standard protein mixture (e.g., Escherichia coli ribosomal proteins) [4].

Database Matching and Identification

The unknown spectrum is compared against a reference spectral library using pattern-matching algorithms [4]. The most common algorithm calculates a log-score value (LSV) ranging from 0 to 3.0, representing the probability of a correct match [4]. Scores above 2.0 are generally considered reliable for species-level identification, while scores between 1.7 and 2.0 indicate genus-level identification [4]. Scores below 1.7 are considered unreliable [4]. The reference library must contain high-quality main spectra (MSPs) or composite spectra for each target species, generated from multiple strains grown under standardized conditions [8, 9, 10].

Database Construction and Customization

The accuracy of MALDI-TOF MS identification is critically dependent on the comprehensiveness and quality of the reference spectral database [8, 9, 10]. Commercial databases are often biased toward human clinical pathogens, necessitating the construction of in-house or custom databases for veterinary applications [8, 9, 10].

In-House Database Development

Several studies have demonstrated the successful construction of custom MALDI-TOF MS databases for veterinary pathogens. Uchida-Fujii et al. developed a database specific to bacteria isolated from horses, incorporating 48 species and achieving 97.3% correct identification at the species level [10, 11]. Mursalim et al. developed and validated a custom peptide database for the rapid identification of Aeromonas spp. isolated from diseased fish, significantly improving identification accuracy compared to the commercial database alone [8]. Ojasanya et al. constructed a main spectral profile for Yersinia ruckeri from Atlantic salmon, enabling rapid and accurate identification of this important aquaculture pathogen [9].

Database Validation and Quality Assurance

Rigorous validation of custom databases is essential. This involves testing the database against a panel of well-characterized reference strains, including type strains and field isolates, and assessing performance metrics such as sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value [8, 9]. External quality assessment programs, such as the international study by Cuénod et al., have highlighted the importance of standardized protocols and database maintenance across laboratories [4]. In that study, 36 laboratories from 12 countries tested 47 challenging bacterial strains, revealing variability in identification rates and underscoring the need for continuous quality improvement [4].

Diagnostic Performance in Veterinary Species

MALDI-TOF MS has been extensively evaluated for the identification of bacterial pathogens from a wide range of animal species, including cattle, swine, poultry, horses, dogs, cats, fish, and exotic animals [6, 12, 7, 13, 14, 3, 28, 30].

Bovine Pathogens

Bovine mastitis is a major economic burden on the dairy industry, and rapid identification of causative agents is critical for effective treatment and control [15, 7, 16, 17, 3]. Jahan et al. evaluated MALDI-TOF MS for the detection of mastitis pathogens from bovine milk samples, reporting high concordance with conventional culture and biochemical identification [3]. Ozbey et al. used MALDI-TOF MS to identify bacterial species in milk and assessed oxidant-antioxidant parameters in blood and milk from cows with different udder health statuses [7]. Pereira et al. compared MALDI-TOF MS and RAPD for grouping Streptococcus agalactiae isolates from subclinical mastitis, demonstrating that MALDI-TOF MS provided rapid and reliable grouping comparable to genotyping [15]. Esener et al. applied machine learning to MALDI-TOF MS spectra for the accurate diagnosis of benzylpenicillin and multidrug resistance in Staphylococcus aureus from bovine mastitis [16]. Maciel-Guerra et al. developed a machine-learning model using MALDI-TOF MS spectra to predict treatment success for Streptococcus uberis clinical mastitis [17].

Bovine respiratory disease (BRD) is another complex syndrome where rapid pathogen identification is valuable [18, 2]. Wang et al. reviewed the diagnostic landscape for Mannheimia haemolytica, a key BRD pathogen, noting the potential of MALDI-TOF MS for rapid identification [18]. Loy et al. discussed current and emerging diagnostic approaches to bacterial diseases of ruminants, including MALDI-TOF MS [1]. Loy also reviewed the development and application of molecular diagnostics and proteomics to BRD, highlighting the role of MALDI-TOF MS in pathogen identification [2].

Swine Pathogens

In swine medicine, MALDI-TOF MS has been applied to the identification of pathogens associated with respiratory disease, enteric infections, and systemic infections. Werinder et al. evaluated MALDI-TOF MS as a species identification tool for Streptococcus suis using whole-genome sequencing as the reference standard, confirming high accuracy [5]. Shuai et al. developed a multiplex detection method combining MALDI-TOF MS with nucleic acid mass spectrometry (NAMS) for porcine diarrheal pathogens, demonstrating the versatility of the platform for simultaneous detection of multiple agents [19].

Poultry Pathogens

Poultry bacterial infections, including those caused by Salmonella, Escherichia coli, Riemerella anatipestifer, and Pasteurella multocida, are significant concerns for flock health and food safety [20, 21, 14]. Persad et al. demonstrated the utility of MALDI-TOF MS for identification and subtyping of Salmonella isolates [21]. Tzora et al. used MALDI-TOF MS to identify Riemerella anatipestifer from a clinical case in commercial broiler chickens and characterized its antibiotic resistance profile [14]. Maddock et al. developed a MALDI-TOF MS model for differentiating hemorrhagic septicemia-causing strains of Pasteurella multocida from other capsular groups, a critical capability for outbreak management [20].

Equine Pathogens

Horses are susceptible to a range of bacterial infections, including respiratory, reproductive, and wound infections. Uchida-Fujii et al. constructed and applied an in-house MALDI-TOF MS database specific to bacteria from horses, significantly improving identification rates for equine pathogens [10, 11]. Al-Kass et al. used MALDI-TOF MS to characterize the microbiota of semen from stallions in Sweden, identifying a diverse range of bacterial species [28].

Canine and Feline Pathogens

In companion animal medicine, MALDI-TOF MS has been applied to the identification of uropathogens, bloodstream infections, and other clinical isolates. Pinthanon et al. used MALDI-TOF MS for rapid identification of canine uropathogens and correlated bacterial species with antimicrobial resistance patterns [12]. Castelain et al. evaluated two Sepsityper MALDI-TOF MS methods for bacterial identification in bloodstream infections in dogs, foals, and calves using a Bayesian latent class model, demonstrating high accuracy [6]. Maeda et al. used the MALDI BioTyper system and rapid BACpro protocol with MALDI-TOF MS for rapid identification of microorganisms causing bacterial urinary tract infections in feline urine samples [30]. Da Silva et al. combined MALDI-TOF MS and genomic analysis to clarify canine brucellosis outbreaks, demonstrating the complementary value of proteomic and genomic approaches [27].

Aquaculture Pathogens

Aquaculture is a rapidly growing sector where bacterial diseases cause significant losses. Mursalim et al. developed a custom MALDI-TOF MS peptide database for the rapid and accurate identification of Aeromonas spp. isolated from diseased fish [8]. Ojasanya et al. developed and validated a main spectral profile for Yersinia ruckeri from Atlantic salmon [9]. Reis et al. used MALDI-TOF MS for the identification of Weissella tructae, a pathogen of rainbow trout [22].

Other Veterinary Applications

MALDI-TOF MS has also been applied to the identification of pathogens from other animal species. Farooq et al. used MALDI-TOF MS to identify immunodominant outer membrane proteins of Fusobacterium necrophorum from severe ovine footrot [23]. McDaniel and Derscheid compared MALDI-TOF MS and high-resolution melting PCR for the identification of Mycoplasma bovis isolates [24]. Paiano et al. assessed the main pathogens associated with clinical and subclinical endometritis in cows using culture and MALDI-TOF MS identification [13]. Nybakken et al. refined the MALDI-TOF MS database for improved identification of Streptococcus dysgalactiae [29]. Ötkün et al. conducted a pilot study on MALDI-TOF MS-based discrimination of Enterococcus faecalis and Lactococcus spp. isolated from bovine milk samples [25]. Fonseca et al. used MALDI-TOF MS combined with machine learning to predict Staphylococcus aureus spa types [26].

Advantages and Limitations

Advantages

MALDI-TOF MS offers several advantages over conventional identification methods. Turnaround time is dramatically reduced, from 24 to 72 hours for biochemical testing to less than 10 minutes per sample [3]. Consumable costs are low, primarily limited to the matrix solution and target plates [3]. The method requires minimal technical expertise for routine operation [3]. Identification accuracy is high, with reported species-level concordance rates exceeding 90% for most veterinary pathogens when appropriate databases are used [6, 12, 3]. The technology can also be used for subtyping, resistance marker detection, and epidemiological typing when combined with machine learning or extended mass range analysis [26, 15, 20, 21, 16, 17].

Limitations

Despite its strengths, MALDI-TOF MS has several limitations. The method requires a pure bacterial culture, adding 18 to 24 hours for primary isolation [3]. It cannot reliably differentiate closely related species with highly similar protein profiles, such as some members of the Enterobacteriaceae or Streptococcus mitis group [4, 5]. Database coverage for veterinary pathogens remains incomplete, particularly for rare or fastidious organisms [8, 9, 10]. The method does not provide direct antimicrobial susceptibility testing, although machine learning approaches applied to spectral data show promise for resistance prediction [16, 17]. Spectral quality can be affected by growth conditions, culture media, and sample preparation, necessitating standardized protocols [4].

Workflow Diagram

The following Mermaid diagram illustrates the typical MALDI-TOF MS workflow for veterinary bacterial identification.

flowchart TD
    A[Clinical Sample Collection], > B[Primary Culture on Agar Plate]
    B, > C[Incubation 18-24 hours]
    C, > D[Single Colony Selection]
    D, > E{Cell Wall Type?}
    E, >|Gram-Negative| F[Direct Spot on Target Plate]
    E, >|Gram-Positive| G[On-Plate Formic Acid Extraction]
    F, > H[Overlay with Matrix Solution]
    G, > H
    H, > I[Drying and Co-crystallization]
    I, > J[Laser Desorption/Ionization]
    J, > K[Time-of-Flight Mass Analysis]
    K, > L[Spectral Acquisition and Processing]
    L, > M[Database Matching]
    M, > N{Log-Score Value?}
    N, >|>= 2.0| O[Species-Level Identification]
    N, >|1.7 - 2.0| P[Genus-Level Identification]
    N, >|< 1.7| Q[No Reliable Identification]
    O, > R[Report Result]
    P, > R
    Q, > S[Repeat Extraction or Subculture]
    S, > D

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the fundamental principle behind MALDI-TOF MS for bacterial identification?

MALDI-TOF MS identifies bacteria by generating mass spectra of highly abundant ribosomal proteins, which serve as species-specific proteomic fingerprints that are matched against a reference database [4, 5].

How is a bacterial sample prepared for MALDI-TOF MS analysis?

A single bacterial colony is applied directly to a target plate, overlaid with a chemical matrix solution, and allowed to dry; for gram-positive bacteria, an on-plate formic acid extraction step is recommended to enhance protein release [3].

What is the role of the matrix in MALDI-TOF MS?

The matrix absorbs laser energy, facilitates desorption and ionization of bacterial proteins, and protects them from fragmentation, enabling the detection of intact protein ions [4].

How is the identification score interpreted in MALDI-TOF MS?

A log-score value (LSV) of 2.0 or higher indicates reliable species-level identification, a score between 1.7 and 2.0 indicates genus-level identification, and a score below 1.7 is considered unreliable [4].

Why are custom databases necessary for veterinary applications?

Commercial databases are often biased toward human pathogens, so custom databases containing spectra from veterinary-relevant species and strains are required to achieve high identification accuracy for animal pathogens [8, 9, 10].

Can MALDI-TOF MS differentiate between closely related bacterial species?

MALDI-TOF MS can differentiate many closely related species, but its resolution is limited for some groups with highly similar ribosomal protein profiles, such as certain members of the Enterobacteriaceae and Streptococcus mitis group [4, 5].

Can MALDI-TOF MS be used for antimicrobial susceptibility testing?

MALDI-TOF MS does not directly provide antimicrobial susceptibility testing, but machine learning analysis of spectral data has shown promise for predicting resistance profiles in some pathogens [16, 17].

What are the main limitations of MALDI-TOF MS in veterinary diagnostics?

The main limitations include the requirement for a pure culture, incomplete database coverage for veterinary pathogens, inability to differentiate some closely related species, and lack of direct antimicrobial susceptibility testing [4, 5, 3].

How does MALDI-TOF MS compare to conventional biochemical identification methods?

MALDI-TOF MS is significantly faster (minutes versus 24-72 hours), has lower consumable costs, and often provides higher accuracy, but it requires an initial culture step and a comprehensive reference database [3].

Is MALDI-TOF MS suitable for identification of fastidious or slow-growing bacteria?

MALDI-TOF MS can identify fastidious bacteria if they can be cultured and if their spectra are present in the reference database, but database gaps for such organisms remain a challenge [8, 9, 10].

Future Directions

The application of MALDI-TOF MS in veterinary microbiology continues to evolve. Integration with machine learning algorithms for resistance prediction and strain typing represents a major frontier [26, 16, 17]. Expansion of custom databases to include emerging pathogens, wildlife species, and zoonotic agents will broaden the technology's utility [8, 9, 10]. Development of direct-from-sample protocols, such as those for blood cultures and milk, will further reduce turnaround times [6, 7]. Combination with other mass spectrometry approaches, such as nucleic acid mass spectrometry, may enable simultaneous detection of multiple pathogens and resistance markers [19]. Standardization of protocols and external quality assessment programs will be essential for ensuring inter-laboratory reproducibility and clinical reliability [4].

Conclusion

MALDI-TOF MS has established itself as a cornerstone technology for veterinary bacterial identification, offering rapid, accurate, and cost-effective proteomic profiling. Its successful application across diverse animal species, including cattle, swine, poultry, horses, dogs, cats, fish, and exotic animals, underscores its versatility and clinical value. The technology's performance is critically dependent on the quality and comprehensiveness of the reference spectral database, necessitating ongoing efforts to construct and validate custom databases for veterinary pathogens. While limitations such as the need for pure culture and incomplete database coverage persist, ongoing advances in machine learning, direct-from-sample processing, and database expansion promise to further enhance the utility of MALDI-TOF MS in veterinary diagnostics.

References

[1] Loy JD, Clawson ML, Adkins PRF et al. Current and Emerging Diagnostic Approaches to Bacterial Diseases of Ruminants. Vet Clin North Am Food Anim Pract. 2023. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36732002/

[2] Loy JD. Development and application of molecular diagnostics and prote

[3] Jahan NA, Godden SM, Royster E et al. Evaluation of the matrix-assisted laser desorption ionization time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) system in the detection of mastitis pathogens from bovine milk samples. J Microbiol Methods. 2021. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33600875/

[4] Cuénod A, Aerni M, Bagutti C et al. Quality of MALDI-TOF mass spectra in routine diagnostics: results from an international external quality assessment including 36 laboratories from 12 countries using 47 challenging bacterial strains. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2023. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35623578/

[5] Werinder A, Aspán A, Söderlund R et al. Whole-Genome Sequencing Evaluation of MALDI-TOF MS as a Species Identification Tool for Streptococcus suis. J Clin Microbiol. 2021. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34469186/

[6] Castelain D, Bokma J, Pas ML et al. Accuracy of two Sepsityper MALDI-TOF MS methods for bacterial identification in bloodstream infections in dogs, foals, and calves using Bayesian latent class model. Vet Q. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40819314/

[7] Ozbey G, Cambay Z, Yilmaz S et al. Identification of bacterial species in milk by MALDI-TOF and assessment of some oxidant-antioxidant parameters in blood and milk from cows with different health status of the udder. Pol J Vet Sci. 2022. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35861970/

[8] Mursalim MF, Raharjo HM, Budiyansah H et al. Development and validation of a custom Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption/Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) peptide database for the rapid and accurate identification of Aeromonas spp. isolated from diseased fish. BMC Vet Res. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41530781/

[9] Ojasanya RA, Gardner IA, Groman D et al. Development and validation of main spectral profile for rapid identification of Yersinia ruckeri isolated from Atlantic salmon using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry. Front Vet Sci. 2022. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36337185/

[10] Uchida-Fujii E, Niwa H, Kinoshita Y et al. Construction and Application of an In-House Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization-Time of Flight Mass Spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) Database Specific to Bacteria From Horses. J Equine Vet Sci. 2021. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34281642/

[11] Uchida-Fujii E, Niwa H, Kinoshita Y et al. Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption Ionization-Time of Flight Mass Spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) for Identification of Bacterial Isolates From Horses. J Equine Vet Sci. 2020. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33276932/

[12] Pinthanon A, Nithitarnwat C, Pintapin C et al. Rapid identification of canine uropathogens by matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time-of-flight mass spectrometry and the clinical factors that correlated bacterial species and antimicrobial resistance. Vet Res Commun. 2023. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37036600/

[13] Paiano RB, Moreno LZ, Gomes VTM et al. Assessment of the main pathogens associated with clinical and subclinical endometritis in cows by culture and MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry identification. J Dairy Sci. 2022. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35181136/

[14] Tzora A, Skoufos S, Bonos E et al. Identification by MALDI-TOF MS and Antibiotic Resistance of Riemerella anatipestifer, Isolated from a Clinical Case in Commercial Broiler Chickens. Vet Sci. 2021. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33671477/

[15] Pereira LBR, Garcia BLN, Fidelis CE et al. Comparative analysis of MALDI-TOF MS and RAPD for grouping Streptococcus agalactiae isolated from subclinical mastitis isolates. Microb Pathog. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40188973/

[16] Esener N, Maciel-Guerra A, Giebel K et al. Mass spectrometry and machine learning for the accurate diagnosis of benzylpenicillin and multidrug resistance of Staphylococcus aureus in bovine mastitis. PLoS Comput Biol. 2021. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34115749/

[17] Maciel-Guerra A, Esener N, Giebel K et al. Prediction of Streptococcus uberis clinical mastitis treatment success in dairy herds by means of mass spectrometry and machine-learning. Sci Rep. 2021. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33833319/

[18] Wang C, Bai X, Wang J et al. Exploring the diagnostic landscape of Mannheimia haemolytica: technologies, applications, and perspectives. Front Microbiol. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41244692/

[19] Shuai J, Song S, Han X et al. Multiplex detection and application of MALDI-TOF NAMS for porcine diarrheal pathogens. Microbiol Spectr. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41143427/

[20] Maddock K, Stenger BLS, Roberts JC et al. Development of a MALDI-TOF MS model for differentiating haemorrhagic septicaemia-causing strains of Pasteurella multocida from other capsular groups. J Microbiol Methods. 2024. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39491557/

[21] Persad AK, Fahmy HA, Anderson N et al. Identification and Subtyping of Salmonella Isolates Using Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-Ionization Time-of-Flight Mass Spectrometry (MALDI-TOF). Microorganisms. 2022. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35456741/

[22] Reis FYT, Rosa JCC, Ortega C et al. Use of MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry for identification of Weissella tructae. Braz J Microbiol. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41772307/

[23] Farooq S, Wani SA, Qureshi S et al. Identification of Immunodominant Outer Membrane Proteins of Fusobacterium necrophorum from Severe Ovine Footrot By MALDI-TOF Mass Spectrometry. Curr Microbiol. 2021. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33638672/

[24] McDaniel AJ, Derscheid RJ. MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry and high-resolution melting PCR for the identification of Mycoplasma bovis isolates. BMC Vet Res. 2021. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33865378/

[25] Ötkün S, Numanoğlu Çevik Y, Tel OY. A pilot study on MALDI-TOF MS-based discrimination of Enterococcus faecalis and Lactococcus spp. isolated from bovine milk samples. World J Microbiol Biotechnol. 2025. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41060513/

[26] Fonseca M, Roy JP, Quintero AF et al. Predicting Staphylococcus aureus spa types using matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry and machine learning. J Dairy Sci. 2026. URL: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41937068/