Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24019981›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

A forward genetic approach in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii as a strategy for exploring starch catabolism.

Hande Tunçay, Justin Findinier, Thierry Duchêne, Virginie Cogez, Charlotte Cousin, Gilles Peltier, Steven G Ball, David Dauvillée

Open access · goldAbstract read
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 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The activation ofPlant direct · 2024
    Article
  4. Autolysin Production fromBio-protocol · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The Chlamydomonas genome project: a decade on.Trends in plant science · 2014
    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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Hande TunçayUnité de Glycobiologie Structurale et Fonctionnelle UMR 8576, CNRS- Université des Sciences et Technologies de Lille, Villeneuve d'Ascq, France.
Justin Findinier
Thierry Duchêne
Virginie Cogez
Charlotte Cousin
Gilles Peltier
Steven G Ball
David Dauvillée
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRInstitut National de la Recherche Agronomique · MA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A screen was recently developed to study the mobilization of starch in the unicellular green alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. This screen relies on starch synthesis accumulation during nitrogen starvation followed by the supply of nitrogen and the switch to darkness. Hence multiple regulatory networks including those of nutrient starvation, cell cycle control and light to dark transitions are likely to impact the recovery of mutant candidates. In this paper we monitor the specificity of this mutant screen by characterizing the nature of the genes disrupted in the selected mutants. We show that one third of the mutants consisted of strains mutated in genes previously reported to be of paramount importance in starch catabolism such as those encoding β-amylases, the maltose export protein, and branching enzyme I. The other mutants were defective for previously uncharacterized functions some of which are likely to define novel proteins affecting starch mobilization in green algae.

Indexed as

Base SequenceChlamydomonas reinhardtiiDNA PrimersMutationPolymerase Chain ReactionStarchDNA PrimersStarch

Identifiers

PMID24019981
PMCPMC3760859
OpenAlexW2003385167

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.