Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21803768›Full record

ArticleGenome biology and evolution2011

Impact of small repeat sequences on bacterial genome evolution.

Nicholas Delihas

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed
3.3field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 95 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. TnMicrobial genomics · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Carbapenem-ResistantAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  5. Biocontrol Effect ofMicroorganisms · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Population Genomics analysis ofMicroorganisms · 2024
    Article
  12. Removal of Phenol byMicroorganisms · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Targeted hypermutation of putative antigen sensors in multicellular bacteria.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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, State University of New York, Stony Brook, NY, USA. nicholas.delihas@stonybrook.edu
State University of New York · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intergenic regions of prokaryotic genomes carry multiple copies of terminal inverted repeat (TIR) sequences, the nonautonomous miniature inverted-repeat transposable element (MITE). In addition, there are the repetitive extragenic palindromic (REP) sequences that fold into a small stem loop rich in G-C bonding. And the clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPRs) display similar small stem loops but are an integral part of a complex genetic element. Other classes of repeats such as the REP2 element do not have TIRs but show other signatures. With the current availability of a large number of whole-genome sequences, many new repeat elements have been discovered. These sequences display diverse properties. Some show an intimate linkage to integrons, and at least one encodes a small RNA. Many repeats are found fused with chromosomal open reading frames, and some are located within protein coding sequences. Small repeat units appear to work hand in hand with the transcriptional and/or post-transcriptional apparatus of the cell. Functionally, they are multifaceted, and this can range from the control of gene expression, the facilitation of host/pathogen interactions, or stimulation of the mammalian immune system. The CRISPR complex displays dramatic functions such as an acquired immune system that defends against invading viruses and plasmids. Evolutionarily, mobile repeat elements may have influenced a cycle of active versus inactive genes in ancestral organisms, and some repeats are concentrated in regions of the chromosome where there is significant genomic plasticity. Changes in the abundance of genomic repeats during the evolution of an organism may have resulted in a benefit to the cell or posed a disadvantage, and some present day species may reflect a purification process. The diverse structure, eclectic functions, and evolutionary aspects of repeat elements are described.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularBacteriaBase SequenceDNA Transposable ElementsGenome, BacterialInverted Repeat SequencesMolecular Sequence DataMolecular StructureOpen Reading FramesRNARNA, UntranslatedTerminal Repeat SequencesDNA Transposable ElementsRNARNA, Untranslated

Identifiers

PMID21803768
PMCPMC3184786
OpenAlexW2142528785

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.