ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2005
Novel DNA sequences from natural strains of the nitrogen-fixing symbiotic bacterium Sinorhizobium meliloti.
Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genomic characterization of Sinorhizobium meliloti AK21, a wild isolate from the Aral Sea Region.SpringerPlus · 2015Article
- Population genomics of Sinorhizobium medicae based on low-coverage sequencing of sympatric isolates.The ISME journal · 2011Article
- Article
- Application of representational difference analysis to identify genomic differences between Bradyrhizobium elkanii and B. Japonicum species.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2010Article
- Application of physical and genetic map of Rhizobium leguminosarum bv. trifolii TA1 to comparison of three closely related rhizobial genomes.Molecular genetics and genomics : MGG · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Variation in genome size and content is common among bacterial strains. Identifying these naturally occurring differences can accelerate our understanding of bacterial attributes, such as ecological specialization and genome evolution. In this study, we used representational difference analysis to identify potentially novel sequences not present in the sequenced laboratory strain Rm1021 of the nitrogen-fixing bacterium Sinorhizobium meliloti. Using strain Rm1021 as the driver and the type strain of S. meliloti ATCC 9930, which has a genome size approximately 370 kilobases bigger than that of strain Rm1021, as the tester, we identified several groups of sequences in the ATCC 9930 genome not present in strain Rm1021. Among the 85 novel DNA fragments examined, 55 showed no obvious homologs anywhere in the public databases. Of the remaining 30 sequences, 24 contained homologs to the Rm1021 genome as well as unique segments not found in Rm1021, 3 contained sequences homologous to those published for another S. meliloti strain but absent in Rm1021, 2 contained sequences homologous to other symbiotic nitrogen-fixing bacteria (Rhizobium etli and Bradyrhizobium japonicum), and 1 contained a sequence homologous to a gene in a non-nitrogen-fixing species, Pseudomonas sp. NK87. Using PCR, we assayed the distribution of 12 of the above 85 novel sequences in a collection of 59 natural S. meliloti strains. The distribution varied widely among the 12 novel DNA fragments, from 1.7% to 72.9%. No apparent correlation was found between the distribution of these novel DNA sequences and their genotypes obtained using multilocus enzyme electrophoresis. Our results suggest potentially high rates of gene gain and loss in S. meliloti genomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.