Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24454864›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Bioinformatics analysis of bacterial annexins--putative ancestral relatives of eukaryotic annexins.

Praveen Kumar Kodavali, Małgorzata Dudkiewicz, Sławomir Pikuła, Krzysztof Pawłowski

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Expression of bovine annexin A4 inBiochemistry and biophysics reports · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Praveen Kumar KodavaliDepartment of Biochemistry, Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland.
Małgorzata DudkiewiczFaculty of Agriculture and Biology, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Warsaw, Poland.
Sławomir PikułaDepartment of Biochemistry, Nencki Institute of Experimental Biology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland.
Krzysztof PawłowskiFaculty of Agriculture and Biology, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Warsaw, Poland.
Warsaw University of Life Sciences · PLInstytut Biologii Doświadczalnej im. Marcelego Nenckiego · PLPolish Academy of Sciences · PL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Annexins are Ca(2+)-binding, membrane-interacting proteins, widespread among eukaryotes, consisting usually of four structurally similar repeated domains. It is accepted that vertebrate annexins derive from a double genome duplication event. It has been postulated that a single domain annexin, if found, might represent a molecule related to the hypothetical ancestral annexin. The recent discovery of a single-domain annexin in a bacterium, Cytophaga hutchinsonii, apparently confirmed this hypothesis. Here, we present a more complex picture. Using remote sequence similarity detection tools, a survey of bacterial genomes was performed in search of annexin-like proteins. In total, we identified about thirty annexin homologues, including single-domain and multi-domain annexins, in seventeen bacterial species. The thorough search yielded, besides the known annexin homologue from C. hutchinsonii, homologues from the Bacteroidetes/Chlorobi phylum, from Gemmatimonadetes, from beta- and delta-Proteobacteria, and from Actinobacteria. The sequences of bacterial annexins exhibited remote but statistically significant similarity to sequence profiles built of the eukaryotic ones. Some bacterial annexins are equipped with additional, different domains, for example those characteristic for toxins. The variation in bacterial annexin sequences, much wider than that observed in eukaryotes, and different domain architectures suggest that annexins found in bacteria may actually descend from an ancestral bacterial annexin, from which eukaryotic annexins also originate. The hypothesis of an ancient origin of bacterial annexins has to be reconciled with the fact that remarkably few bacterial strains possess annexin genes compared to the thousands of known bacterial genomes and with the patchy, anomalous phylogenetic distribution of bacterial annexins. Thus, a massive annexin gene loss in several bacterial lineages or very divergent evolution would appear a likely explanation. Alternative evolutionary scenarios, involving horizontal gene transfer between bacteria and protozoan eukaryotes, in either direction, appear much less likely. Altogether, current evidence does not allow unequivocal judgement as to the origin of bacterial annexins.

Indexed as

Amino Acid SequenceAnimalsAnnexinsBacteriaBacterial ProteinsComputational BiologyConserved SequenceHumansMolecular Sequence AnnotationMolecular Sequence DataPhylogenyProtein Structure, TertiaryAnnexinsBacterial Proteins

Identifiers

PMID24454864
PMCPMC3894181
OpenAlexW2067551542

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.