Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20639323›Full record

ArticleJournal of bacteriology2010

Genome sequences of Lactococcus lactis MG1363 (revised) and NZ9000 and comparative physiological studies.

Daniel M Linares, Jan Kok, Bert Poolman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of bacteriology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 80 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
80citing 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

80 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Pharmaceutics · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. EngineeringFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The NagY antiterminator inMicrobiology spectrum · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. HyperpolarizedMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Preparation and In Vitro Characterization ofJournal of functional biomaterials · 2024
    Article
  17. Development of ZnSynthetic and systems biotechnology · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. PBP2b Mutations Improve the Growth of Phage-ResistantApplied and environmental microbiology · 2023
    Article
  20. Article

20 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

3 authors.

Daniel M LinaresDepartment of Biochemistry, Groningen Biomolecular Sciences and Biotechnology Institute, Netherlands Proteomics Centre and Zernike Institute for Advanced Materials, University of Groningen, Nijenborgh 4, 9747 AG Groningen, Netherlands.
Jan Kok
Bert Poolman

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lactococcus lactis NZ9000 and its parent MG1363 are the most commonly used lactic acid bacteria for expression and physiological studies. We noted unexpected but significant differences in the growth behaviors of both strains. We sequenced the entire genomes of the original NZ9000 and MG1363 strains using an ultradeep sequencing strategy. The analysis of the L. lactis NZ9000 genome yielded 79 differences, mostly point mutations, with the annotated genome sequence of L. lactis MG1363. Resequencing of the MG1363 strain revealed that 73 out of the 79 differences were due to errors in the published sequence. Comparative transcriptomic studies revealed several differences in the regulation of genes involved in sugar fermentation, which can be explained by two specific mutations in a region of the ptcC promoter with a key role in the regulation of cellobiose and glucose uptake.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingBase SequenceGene Expression Regulation, BacterialGenome, BacterialLactococcus lactisMolecular Sequence DataPolymorphism, Single Nucleotide

Identifiers

PMID20639323
PMCPMC2953693

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.