Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15728743›Full record

ArticleNucleic acids research2005

Variation in the strength of selected codon usage bias among bacteria.

Paul M Sharp, Elizabeth Bailes, Russell J Grocock, John F Peden, R Elizabeth Sockett

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nucleic acids research, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 224 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
224citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

224 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Mitochondrial Genome ofAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Cell type-specific purifying selection of synonymous mitochondrial DNA variation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Macroevolutionary changes in natural selection on codon usage reflect evolution of the tRNA pool across a budding yeast subphylum.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

164 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Paul M SharpInstitute of Genetics, University of Nottingham, Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK. paul@evol.nott.ac.uk
Elizabeth Bailes
Russell J Grocock
John F Peden
R Elizabeth Sockett

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Among bacteria, many species have synonymous codon usage patterns that have been influenced by natural selection for those codons that are translated more accurately and/or efficiently. However, in other species selection appears to have been ineffective. Here, we introduce a population genetics-based model for quantifying the extent to which selection has been effective. The approach is applied to 80 phylogenetically diverse bacterial species for which whole genome sequences are available. The strength of selected codon usage bias, S, is found to vary substantially among species; in 30% of the genomes examined, there was no significant evidence that selection had been effective. Values of S are highly positively correlated with both the number of rRNA operons and the number of tRNA genes. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that species exposed to selection for rapid growth have more rRNA operons, more tRNA genes and more strongly selected codon usage bias. For example, Clostridium perfringens, the species with the highest value of S, can have a generation time as short as 7 min.

Indexed as

CodonBacteriaGC Rich SequenceGene DosageGenes, rRNAGenome, BacterialOperonPhylogenyRNA, TransferCodonRNA, Transfer

Identifiers

PMID15728743
PMCPMC549432

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.