Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21698131›Full record

ReviewPLoS genetics2011

Chromosomal macrodomains and associated proteins: implications for DNA organization and replication in gram negative bacteria.

Remus T Dame, Olga J Kalmykowa, David C Grainger

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PLoS genetics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed
9.0field-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

58 citing papers in PubMed, 109 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Comprehensive Characterization ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Remus T DameLeiden Institute of Chemistry, Gorlaeus Laboratories, Laboratory of Molecular Genetics and Cell Observatory, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Olga J Kalmykowa
David C Grainger
Leiden University · NLUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/H010289/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Escherichia coli chromosome is organized into four macrodomains, the function and organisation of which are poorly understood. In this review we focus on the MatP, SeqA, and SlmA proteins that have recently been identified as the first examples of factors with macrodomain-specific DNA-binding properties. In particular, we review the evidence that these factors contribute towards the control of chromosome replication and segregation by specifically targeting subregions of the genome and contributing towards their unique properties. Genome sequence analysis of multiple related bacteria, including pathogenic species, reveals that macrodomain-specific distribution of SeqA, SlmA, and MatP is conserved, suggesting common principles of chromosome organisation in these organisms. This discovery of proteins with macrodomain-specific binding properties hints that there are other proteins with similar specificity yet to be unveiled. We discuss the roles of the proteins identified to date as well as strategies that may be employed to discover new factors.

Indexed as

Bacterial ProteinsChromosomes, BacterialDNA, BacterialDNA-Binding ProteinsGene Expression Regulation, BacterialGram-Negative BacteriaBacterial ProteinsDNA, BacterialDNA-Binding Proteins

Identifiers

PMID21698131
PMCPMC3116907
OpenAlexW2071046223

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.