Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18086200›Full record

ReviewMolecular microbiology2008

Small mobile sequences in bacteria display diverse structure/function motifs.

Nicholas Delihas

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular microbiology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. A Novel Family ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2020
    Article
  10. MITEmSphere · 2019
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Bacterial genome instability.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2014
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nicholas DelihasDepartment of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, School of Medicine, SUNY, Stony Brook, NY 11794-5222, USA. nDelihas@ms.cc.sunysb.edu
Stony Brook School · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Small repeat sequences in bacterial genomes, which represent non-autonomous mobile elements, have close similarities to archaeon and eukaryotic miniature inverted repeat transposable elements. These repeat elements are found in both intergenic and intragenic chromosomal regions, and contain an array of diverse motifs. These can include DNA sequences containing an integration host factor binding site and a proposed DNA methyltransferase recognition site, transcribed RNA secondary structural motifs, which are involved in mRNA regulation, and translated open reading frames found fused to other open reading frames. Some bacterial mobile element fusions are in evolutionarily conserved protein and RNA genes. Others might represent or lead to creation of new protein genes. Here we review the remarkable properties of these small bacterial mobile elements in the context of possible beneficial roles resulting from random insertions into the genome.

Indexed as

Interspersed Repetitive SequencesBacteriaDNA, BacterialMutagenesis, InsertionalRecombination, GeneticRepetitive Sequences, Nucleic AcidDNA, Bacterial

Identifiers

PMID18086200
PMCPMC2229807
OpenAlexW2114770490

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.