Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24612508›Full record

ArticleMicrobial cell factories2014

A high-throughput, restriction-free cloning and screening strategy based on ccdB-gene replacement.

Bjarte Aarmo Lund, Hanna-Kirsti Schrøder Leiros, Gro Elin Kjæreng Bjerga

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbial cell factories, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Biochemical and biophysical characterization of the OXA-48-like carbapenemase OXA-436.Acta crystallographica. Section F, Structural biology communications · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

3 authors.

Bjarte Aarmo Lund
Hanna-Kirsti Schrøder Leiros
Gro Elin Kjæreng BjergaNorStruct, Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science and Technology, UiT - The Arctic University of Norway, N-9037 Tromsø, Norway. gro.bjerga@uni.no.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn high-throughput demanding fields, such as biotechnology and structural biology, molecular cloning is an essential tool in obtaining high yields of recombinant protein. Here, we address recently developed restriction-free methods in cloning, and present a more cost-efficient protocol that has been optimized to improve both cloning and clone screening.

resultsIn our case study, three homologous β-lactamase genes were successfully cloned using these restriction-free protocols. To clone the genes, we chose a gene replacement strategy, where the recombinant genes contained overhangs that targeted a region of the expression vector including a cytotoxin-encoding ccdB-gene.

conclusionWe provide further evidence that gene replacement can be applied with high-throughput cloning protocols. Targeting a replacement of the ccdB-gene was found to be very successful for counterselection using these protocols. This eliminated the need for treatment with the restriction enzyme DpnI that has so far been the preferred clone selection approach. We thus present an optimized cloning protocol using a restriction-free ccdB-gene replacement strategy, which allows for parallel cloning at a high-throughput level.

Indexed as

Cloning, Molecularbeta-LactamasesCytotoxinsEscherichia coliGenetic VectorsPolymerase Chain ReactionRecombinant ProteinsRecombination, Geneticbeta-LactamasesCytotoxinsoxacillinaseRecombinant Proteins

Identifiers

PMID24612508
PMCPMC3996003

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.