Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26340565›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2015

Evolution of Intra-specific Regulatory Networks in a Multipartite Bacterial Genome.

Marco Galardini, Matteo Brilli, Giulia Spini, Matteo Rossi, Bianca Roncaglia, Alessia Bani, Manuela Chiancianesi, Marco Moretto, Kristof Engelen, Giovanni Bacci and 4 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
10.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Unveiling the Functions of Two RpoNs inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  3. A Near-T2T Genome Assembly ofJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Why are rhizobial symbiosis genes mobile?Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

14 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Marco GalardiniDepartment of Biology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Matteo BrilliDepartment of Genomics and Biology of Fruit Crops, Research and Innovation Centre, Fondazione Edmund Mach (FEM), San Michele all'Adige, Italy.
Giulia SpiniDipartimento di Biotecnologie Agrarie, Sezione di Microbiologia, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Matteo RossiDepartment of Biology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Bianca RoncagliaDepartment of Biology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Alessia BaniDepartment of Biology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Manuela ChiancianesiDepartment of Biology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Marco MorettoDepartment of Computational Biology, Research and Innovation Centre, Fondazione Edmund Mach (FEM), San Michele all'Adige, Italy.
Kristof EngelenDepartment of Computational Biology, Research and Innovation Centre, Fondazione Edmund Mach (FEM), San Michele all'Adige, Italy.
Giovanni BacciDepartment of Biology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy; Consiglio per la Ricerca e la Sperimentazione in Agricoltura, Centro di Ricerca per lo Studio delle Relazioni tra Pianta e Suolo (CRA-RPS), Rome, Italy.
Francesco PiniInterdisciplinary Research Institute USR3078, CNRS-Universit Lille Nord de France, Villeneuve d'Ascq, France.
Emanuele G BiondiInterdisciplinary Research Institute USR3078, CNRS-Universit Lille Nord de France, Villeneuve d'Ascq, France.
Marco BazzicalupoDepartment of Biology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Alessio MengoniDepartment of Biology, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
University of Florence · ITFondazione Edmund Mach · ITCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reconstruction of the regulatory network is an important step in understanding how organisms control the expression of gene products and therefore phenotypes. Recent studies have pointed out the importance of regulatory network plasticity in bacterial adaptation and evolution. The evolution of such networks within and outside the species boundary is however still obscure. Sinorhizobium meliloti is an ideal species for such study, having three large replicons, many genomes available and a significant knowledge of its transcription factors (TF). Each replicon has a specific functional and evolutionary mark; which might also emerge from the analysis of their regulatory signatures. Here we have studied the plasticity of the regulatory network within and outside the S. meliloti species, looking for the presence of 41 TFs binding motifs in 51 strains and 5 related rhizobial species. We have detected a preference of several TFs for one of the three replicons, and the function of regulated genes was found to be in accordance with the overall replicon functional signature: house-keeping functions for the chromosome, metabolism for the chromid, symbiosis for the megaplasmid. This therefore suggests a replicon-specific wiring of the regulatory network in the S. meliloti species. At the same time a significant part of the predicted regulatory network is shared between the chromosome and the chromid, thus adding an additional layer by which the chromid integrates itself in the core genome. Furthermore, the regulatory network distance was found to be correlated with both promoter regions and accessory genome evolution inside the species, indicating that both pangenome compartments are involved in the regulatory network evolution. We also observed that genes which are not included in the species regulatory network are more likely to belong to the accessory genome, indicating that regulatory interactions should also be considered to predict gene conservation in bacterial pangenomes.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticComputational BiologyEvolution, MolecularGene Regulatory NetworksGenome, BacterialSinorhizobium meliloti

Identifiers

PMID26340565
PMCPMC4560400
OpenAlexW1830184716

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.