Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23555032›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

Genomic comparison between Salmonella Gallinarum and Pullorum: differential pseudogene formation under common host restriction.

Ye Feng, Randal N Johnston, Gui-Rong Liu, Shu-Lin Liu

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Comparative Biofilmomics of Antimicrobial-ResistantAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  6. Article
  7. For Someone, You Are the Whole World: Host-Specificity ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  8. Isolation and Molecular Identification ofArchives of Razi Institute · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Revisiting PersistentPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  11. Efficacy ofViruses · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Pathogenic signature of invasive non-typhoidalHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2020
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Selection-Driven Gene Inactivation in Salmonella.Genome biology and evolution · 2020
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

4 authors.

Ye FengGenomics Research Center (one of The State-Province Key Laboratories of Biomedicine-Pharmaceutics of China), Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
Randal N Johnston
Gui-Rong Liu
Shu-Lin Liu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSalmonella serovars Enteritidis and Gallinarum are closely related, but their host ranges are very different: the former is host-promiscuous and the latter can infect poultry only. Comparison of their genomic sequences reveals that Gallinarum has undergone much more extensive degradation than Enteritidis. This phenomenon has also been observed in other host restricted Salmonella serovars, such as Typhi and Paratyphi A. The serovar Gallinarum can be further split into two biovars: Gallinarum and Pullorum, which take poultry as their common host but cause distinct diseases, with the former eliciting typhoid and the latter being a dysentery agent. Genomic comparison of the two pathogens, with a focus on pseudogenes, would provide insights into the evolutionary processes that might have facilitated the formation of host-restricted Salmonella pathogens. METHODOLOGIES/PRINCIPAL

findingsWe sequenced the complete genome of Pullorum strains and made comparison with Gallinarum and other Salmonella lineages. The gene contents of Gallinarum and Pullorum were highly similar, but their pseudogene compositions differed considerably. About one fourth of pseudogenes had the same inactivation mutations in Gallinarum and Pullorum but these genes remained intact in Enteritidis, suggesting that the ancestral Gallinarum may have already been restricted to poultry. On the other hand, the remaining pseudogenes were either in the same genes but with different inactivation sites or unique to Gallinarum or Pullorum, reflecting unnecessary functions in infecting poultry.

conclusionsOur results support the hypothesis that the divergence between Gallinarum and Pullorum was initiated and facilitated by host restriction. Formation of pseudogenes instead of gene deletion is the major form of genomic degradation. Given the short divergence history of Gallinarum and Pullorum, the effect of host restriction on genomic degradation is huge and rapid, and such effect seems to be continuing to work. The pseudogenes may reflect the unnecessary functions for Salmonella within the poultry host.

Indexed as

Genome, BacterialGenomicsPseudogenesAnimalsBacterial Typing TechniquesBase SequenceChickensGenetic SpeciationHost SpecificityHumansMolecular Sequence DataMutationPhylogenyPoultry DiseasesSalmonellaSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID23555032
PMCPMC3598799

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.