Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22820946›Full record

ArticleThe EMBO journal2012

Sister chromatid interactions in bacteria revealed by a site-specific recombination assay.

Christian Lesterlin, Emmanuelle Gigant, Frédéric Boccard, Olivier Espéli

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The EMBO journal, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Replicating Chromosomes in Whole-Cell Models of Bacteria.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Dynamics of chromosome organization in a minimal bacterial cell.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Engineering of a newMetabolic engineering communications · 2021
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Christian LesterlinCentre de Génétique Moléculaire du CNRS, Gif-sur-Yvette, France.
Emmanuelle Gigant
Frédéric Boccard
Olivier Espéli
Centre de Génétique Moléculaire · FRCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The process of Sister Chromosome Cohesion (SCC), which holds together sister chromatids upon replication, is essential for chromosome segregation and DNA repair in eukaryotic cells. Although cohesion at the molecular level has never been described in E. coli, previous studies have reported that sister sequences remain co-localized for a period after their replication. Here, we have developed a new genetic recombination assay that probes the ability of newly replicated chromosome loci to interact physically. We show that Sister Chromatid Interaction (SCI) occurs exclusively within a limited time frame after replication. Importantly, we could differentiate sister cohesion and co-localization since factors such as MatP and MukB that reduced the co-localization of markers had no effect on molecular cohesion. The frequency of sister chromatid interactions were modulated by the activity of Topo-IV, revealing that DNA topology modulates cohesion at the molecular scale in bacteria.

Indexed as

Sister Chromatid ExchangeChromatidsDNA ReplicationDNA Topoisomerase IVEscherichia coliModels, BiologicalTime FactorsDNA Topoisomerase IV

Identifiers

PMID22820946
PMCPMC3419930
OpenAlexW2098975034

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.