Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21963803›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Microbiology2011

Microbial degradation of aromatic compounds - from one strategy to four.

Georg Fuchs, Matthias Boll, Johann Heider

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Microbiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 382 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
382citing papers in PubMed
27.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

382 citing papers in PubMed, 1,186 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Breath volatile profiling reveals a diagnostic signature of MASLD in children.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

322 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Georg FuchsMikrobiologie, Universität Freiburg, Schänzlestr. 1, D-79104 Freiburg, Germany. georg.fuchs@biologie.uni-freiburg.de
Matthias Boll
Johann Heider
Leipzig University · DEPhilipps University of Marburg · DEUniversity of Freiburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aromatic compounds are both common growth substrates for microorganisms and prominent environmental pollutants. The crucial step in their degradation is overcoming the resonance energy that stabilizes the ring structure. The classical strategy for degradation comprises an attack by oxygenases that hydroxylate and finally cleave the ring with the help of activated molecular oxygen. Here, we describe three alternative strategies used by microorganisms to degrade aromatic compounds. All three of these methods involve the use of CoA thioesters and ring cleavage by hydrolysis. However, these strategies are based on different ring activation mechanisms that consist of either formation of a non-aromatic ring-epoxide under oxic conditions, or reduction of the aromatic ring under anoxic conditions using one of two completely different systems.

Indexed as

Metabolic Networks and PathwaysBacteriaBiotransformationEnvironmental PollutantsOxidation-ReductionPolycyclic Aromatic HydrocarbonsEnvironmental PollutantsPolycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

Identifiers

PMID21963803
OpenAlexW2048687101

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.