ArticlePloS one2013
Metagenomic screening for aromatic compound-responsive transcriptional regulators.
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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Construction of Aerobic/Anaerobic-Substrate-Induced Gene Expression Procedure for Exploration of Metagenomes From Subseafloor Sediments.Frontiers in microbiology · 2021Article
- Bioprospecting Microbial Diversity for Lignin Valorization: Dry and Wet Screening Methods.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Review
- Rapid Enrichment and Isolation of Polyphosphate-Accumulating Organisms Through 4'6-Diamidino-2-Phenylindole (DAPI) Staining With Fluorescence-Activated Cell Sorting (FACS).Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Article
- Rhizosphere Metagenomics ofMicroorganisms · 2019Article
- Genetically encoded biosensors for lignocellulose valorization.Biotechnology for biofuels · 2019Review
- Recent Advances in Function-based Metagenomic Screening.Genomics, proteomics & bioinformatics · 2018Review
- The evolving interface between synthetic biology and functional metagenomics.Nature chemical biology · 2018Review
- Metatranscriptome Analysis Deciphers Multifunctional Genes and Enzymes Linked With the Degradation of Aromatic Compounds and Pesticides in the Wheat Rhizosphere.Frontiers in microbiology · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We applied a metagenomics approach to screen for transcriptional regulators that sense aromatic compounds. The library was constructed by cloning environmental DNA fragments into a promoter-less vector containing green fluorescence protein. Fluorescence-based screening was then performed in the presence of various aromatic compounds. A total of 12 clones were isolated that fluoresced in response to salicylate, 3-methyl catechol, 4-chlorocatechol and chlorohydroquinone. Sequence analysis revealed at least 1 putative transcriptional regulator, excluding 1 clone (CHLO8F). Deletion analysis identified compound-specific transcriptional regulators; namely, 8 LysR-types, 2 two-component-types and 1 AraC-type. Of these, 9 representative clones were selected and their reaction specificities to 18 aromatic compounds were investigated. Overall, our transcriptional regulators were functionally diverse in terms of both specificity and induction rates. LysR- and AraC- type regulators had relatively narrow specificities with high induction rates (5-50 fold), whereas two-component-types had wide specificities with low induction rates (3 fold). Numerous transcriptional regulators have been deposited in sequence databases, but their functions remain largely unknown. Thus, our results add valuable information regarding the sequence-function relationship of transcriptional regulators.
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.