Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20886356›Full record

ArticleMolecular genetics and genomics : MGG2010

Functional genomics of probiotic Escherichia coli Nissle 1917 and 83972, and UPEC strain CFT073: comparison of transcriptomes, growth and biofilm formation.

Viktoria Hancock, Rebecca Munk Vejborg, Per Klemm

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular genetics and genomics : MGG, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

46 citing papers in PubMed, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. ProbioticFrontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Gastrointestinal dysbiosis and Escherichia coli pathobionts in inflammatory bowel diseases.APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. "Omics" Technologies - What Have They Told Us About UropathogenicFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Siderophore-Microcins inFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2020
    Review
  17. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Viktoria HancockMicrobial Adhesion Group, DTU Food, Bldg. 204, Technical University of Denmark, 2800 Lyngby, Denmark. vhan@food.dtu.dk
Rebecca Munk Vejborg
Per Klemm
Technical University of Denmark · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Strain CFT073 is a bona fide uropathogen, whereas strains 83972 and Nissle 1917 are harmless probiotic strains of urinary tract and faecal origin, respectively. Despite their different environmental origins and dispositions the three strains are very closely related and the ancestors of 83972 and Nissle 1917 must have been very similar to CFT073. Here, we report the first functional genome profiling of Nissle 1917 and the first biofilm profiling of a uropathogen. Transcriptomic profiling revealed that Nissle 1917 expressed many UPEC-associated genes and showed that the active genomic profiles of the three strains are closely related. The data demonstrate that the distance from a pathogen to a probiotic strain can be surprisingly short. We demonstrate that Nissle 1917, in spite of its intestinal niche origin, grows well in urine, and is a good biofilm former in this medium in which it also out-competes CFT073 during planktonic growth. The role in biofilm formation of three up-regulated genes, yhaK, yhcN and ybiJ, was confirmed by knockout mutants in Nissle 1917 and CFT073. Two of these mutants CFT073∆yhcN and CFT073∆ybiJ had significantly reduced motility compared with the parent strain, arguably accounting for the impaired biofilm formation. Although the three strains have very different strategies vis-à-vis the human host their functional gene profiles are surprisingly similar. It is also interesting to note that the only two Escherichia coli strains used as probiotics are in fact deconstructed pathogens.

Indexed as

ProbioticsBiofilmsEscherichia coliEscherichia coli InfectionsGene Expression ProfilingGene Knockout TechniquesGenetic Complementation TestGenome, BacterialGenomicsHost-Pathogen InteractionsHumansIn Vitro TechniquesIronMutationOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain ReactionIron

Identifiers

PMID20886356
OpenAlexW1995356245

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.