ArticlePloS one2013
Genomic phenotyping by barcode sequencing broadly distinguishes between alkylating agents, oxidizing agents, and non-genotoxic agents, and reveals a role for aromatic amino acids in cellular recovery after quinone exposure.
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 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Signature-Tagged Mutagenesis (STM)-based murine-infectivity assay for Cryptococcus neoformans.Journal of microbiology (Seoul, Korea) · 2020Article
- Functional toxicology: tools to advance the future of toxicity testing.Frontiers in genetics · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Toxicity screening of compounds provides a means to identify compounds harmful for human health and the environment. Here, we further develop the technique of genomic phenotyping to improve throughput while maintaining specificity. We exposed cells to eight different compounds that rely on different modes of action: four genotoxic alkylating (methyl methanesulfonate (MMS), N-Methyl-N-nitrosourea (MNU), N,N'-bis(2-chloroethyl)-N-nitroso-urea (BCNU), N-ethylnitrosourea (ENU)), two oxidizing (2-methylnaphthalene-1,4-dione (menadione, MEN), benzene-1,4-diol (hydroquinone, HYQ)), and two non-genotoxic (methyl carbamate (MC) and dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO)) compounds. A library of S. cerevisiae 4,852 deletion strains, each identifiable by a unique genetic 'barcode', were grown in competition; at different time points the ratio between the strains was assessed by quantitative high throughput 'barcode' sequencing. The method was validated by comparison to previous genomic phenotyping studies and 90% of the strains identified as MMS-sensitive here were also identified as MMS-sensitive in a much lower throughput solid agar screen. The data provide profiles of proteins and pathways needed for recovery after both genotoxic and non-genotoxic compounds. In addition, a novel role for aromatic amino acids in the recovery after treatment with oxidizing agents was suggested. The role of aromatic acids was further validated; the quinone subgroup of oxidizing agents were extremely toxic in cells where tryptophan biosynthesis was compromised.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.