Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25624469›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2015

Chemical signature of magnetotactic bacteria.

Matthieu Amor, Vincent Busigny, Mickaël Durand-Dubief, Mickaël Tharaud, Georges Ona-Nguema, Alexandre Gélabert, Edouard Alphandéry, Nicolas Menguy, Marc F Benedetti, Imène Chebbi and 1 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2015. 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
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Biogeochemical fingerprinting of magnetotactic bacterial magnetite.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Nanotechnology for Targeted Detection and Removal of Bacteria: Opportunities and Challenges.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2021
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Phylogenetic and Structural Identification of a Novel MagnetotacticApplied and environmental microbiology · 2019
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Biosynthesis of magnetic nanoparticles from nano-degradation products revealed in human stem cells.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019
    Article
  12. Review
  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

11 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Matthieu AmorInstitut de Physique du Globe de Paris, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Université Paris Diderot, UMR 7154 CNRS, 75238 Paris, France; Institut de Minéralogie, de Physique des Matériaux et de Cosmochimie, Sorbonne Universités, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, UMR 7590 CNRS, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement UMR 206, Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, 75252 Paris Cedex 05, France; and amor@ipgp.fr.
Vincent BusignyInstitut de Physique du Globe de Paris, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Université Paris Diderot, UMR 7154 CNRS, 75238 Paris, France;
Mickaël Durand-DubiefNanobactérie SARL, 75016 Paris, France.
Mickaël TharaudInstitut de Physique du Globe de Paris, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Université Paris Diderot, UMR 7154 CNRS, 75238 Paris, France;
Georges Ona-NguemaInstitut de Minéralogie, de Physique des Matériaux et de Cosmochimie, Sorbonne Universités, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, UMR 7590 CNRS, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement UMR 206, Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, 75252 Paris Cedex 05, France; and.
Alexandre GélabertInstitut de Physique du Globe de Paris, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Université Paris Diderot, UMR 7154 CNRS, 75238 Paris, France;
Edouard AlphandéryInstitut de Minéralogie, de Physique des Matériaux et de Cosmochimie, Sorbonne Universités, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, UMR 7590 CNRS, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement UMR 206, Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, 75252 Paris Cedex 05, France; and Nanobactérie SARL, 75016 Paris, France.
Nicolas MenguyInstitut de Minéralogie, de Physique des Matériaux et de Cosmochimie, Sorbonne Universités, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, UMR 7590 CNRS, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement UMR 206, Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, 75252 Paris Cedex 05, France; and.
Marc F BenedettiInstitut de Physique du Globe de Paris, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Université Paris Diderot, UMR 7154 CNRS, 75238 Paris, France;
Imène ChebbiNanobactérie SARL, 75016 Paris, France.
François GuyotInstitut de Minéralogie, de Physique des Matériaux et de Cosmochimie, Sorbonne Universités, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, UMR 7590 CNRS, Institut de Recherche pour le Développement UMR 206, Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, 75252 Paris Cedex 05, France; and.
Nanobiotix (France) · FRUniversité Paris Cité · FRCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRInstitut de minéralogie, de physique des matériaux et de cosmochimie · FRInstitut de physique du globe de Paris · FRInstitut de Recherche pour le Développement · FRSorbonne Paris Cité · FRSorbonne Université · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There are longstanding and ongoing controversies about the abiotic or biological origin of nanocrystals of magnetite. On Earth, magnetotactic bacteria perform biomineralization of intracellular magnetite nanoparticles under a controlled pathway. These bacteria are ubiquitous in modern natural environments. However, their identification in ancient geological material remains challenging. Together with physical and mineralogical properties, the chemical composition of magnetite was proposed as a promising tracer for bacterial magnetofossil identification, but this had never been explored quantitatively and systematically for many trace elements. Here, we determine the incorporation of 34 trace elements in magnetite in both cases of abiotic aqueous precipitation and of production by the magnetotactic bacterium Magnetospirillum magneticum strain AMB-1. We show that, in biomagnetite, most elements are at least 100 times less concentrated than in abiotic magnetite and we provide a quantitative pattern of this depletion. Furthermore, we propose a previously unidentified method based on strontium and calcium incorporation to identify magnetite produced by magnetotactic bacteria in the geological record.

Indexed as

Analysis of VarianceBiomarkersCell Culture TechniquesFermentationFerrosoferric OxideMagnetite NanoparticlesMagnetospirillumMicroscopy, Electron, TransmissionTrace ElementsBiomarkersFerrosoferric OxideMagnetite NanoparticlesTrace Elementsbiomineralizationmagnetitemagnetotactic bacteriatrace element incorporation

Identifiers

PMID25624469
PMCPMC4330721
OpenAlexW2042809533

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.