Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20717142›Full record

ReviewThe EMBO journal2010

Spatial organization in bacterial chemotaxis.

Victor Sourjik, Judith P Armitage

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The EMBO journal, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 92 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
92citing papers in PubMed
10.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

92 citing papers in PubMed, 147 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. AnApplied and environmental microbiology · 2024
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Uncovering cognitive similarities and differences, conservation and innovation.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Victor SourjikZentrum für Molekulare Biologie der Universität Heidelberg, DKFZ-ZMBH Alliance, Im Neuenheimer Feld, Heidelberg, Germany. v.sourjik@zmbh.uni-heidelberg.de
Judith P Armitage
Heidelberg University · DEUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spatial organization of signalling is not an exclusive property of eukaryotic cells. Despite the fact that bacterial signalling pathways are generally simpler than those in eukaryotes, there are several well-documented examples of higher-order intracellular signalling structures in bacteria. One of the most prominent and best-characterized structures is formed by proteins that control bacterial chemotaxis. Signals in chemotaxis are processed by ordered arrays, or clusters, of receptors and associated proteins, which amplify and integrate chemotactic stimuli in a highly cooperative manner. Receptor clusters further serve to scaffold protein interactions, enhancing the efficiency and specificity of the pathway reactions and preventing the formation of signalling gradients through the cell body. Moreover, clustering can also ensure spatial separation of multiple chemotaxis systems in one bacterium. Assembly of receptor clusters appears to be a stochastic process, but bacteria evolved mechanisms to ensure optimal cluster distribution along the cell body for partitioning to daughter cells at division.

Indexed as

ChemotaxisBacteriaBacterial ProteinsSignal TransductionBacterial Proteins

Identifiers

PMID20717142
PMCPMC2924652
OpenAlexW2160460391

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.