Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26426997›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Genome and Phenotype Microarray Analyses of Rhodococcus sp. BCP1 and Rhodococcus opacus R7: Genetic Determinants and Metabolic Abilities with Environmental Relevance.

Alessandro Orro, Martina Cappelletti, Pasqualina D'Ursi, Luciano Milanesi, Alessandra Di Canito, Jessica Zampolli, Elena Collina, Francesca Decorosi, Carlo Viti, Stefano Fedi and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. International journal of systematic and evolutionary microbiology · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Insights into polyethylene biodegradative fingerprint ofFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Genome-Based Exploration ofMicroorganisms · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Frontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Microbial genomics · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. The Complete Genome Sequence and Structure of the OleaginousFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Comparative Genomics of theMicroorganisms · 2020
    Article
  18. Transcriptomic Analysis ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2020
    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

13 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Alessandro OrroInstitute of Biomedical Technology, CNR, Segrate, Milano, Italy.
Martina CappellettiDepartment of Pharmacy and Biotechnology, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Pasqualina D'UrsiInstitute of Biomedical Technology, CNR, Segrate, Milano, Italy.
Luciano MilanesiInstitute of Biomedical Technology, CNR, Segrate, Milano, Italy.
Alessandra Di CanitoDepartment of Biotechnology and Biosciences, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy.
Jessica ZampolliDepartment of Biotechnology and Biosciences, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy; Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy.
Elena CollinaDepartment of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy.
Francesca DecorosiDepartment of Agrifood Production and Environmental Sciences, University of Firenze, Firenze, Italy.
Carlo VitiDepartment of Agrifood Production and Environmental Sciences, University of Firenze, Firenze, Italy.
Stefano FediDepartment of Pharmacy and Biotechnology, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Alessandro PresentatoDepartment of Pharmacy and Biotechnology, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Davide ZannoniDepartment of Pharmacy and Biotechnology, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Patrizia Di GennaroDepartment of Biotechnology and Biosciences, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milano, Italy.
University of Bologna · ITUniversity of Milano-Bicocca · ITInstitute of Biomedical Technologies · ITUniversity of Florence · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this paper comparative genome and phenotype microarray analyses of Rhodococcus sp. BCP1 and Rhodococcus opacus R7 were performed. Rhodococcus sp. BCP1 was selected for its ability to grow on short-chain n-alkanes and R. opacus R7 was isolated for its ability to grow on naphthalene and on o-xylene. Results of genome comparison, including BCP1, R7, along with other Rhodococcus reference strains, showed that at least 30% of the genome of each strain presented unique sequences and only 50% of the predicted proteome was shared. To associate genomic features with metabolic capabilities of BCP1 and R7 strains, hundreds of different growth conditions were tested through Phenotype Microarray, by using Biolog plates and plates manually prepared with additional xenobiotic compounds. Around one-third of the surveyed carbon sources was utilized by both strains although R7 generally showed higher metabolic activity values compared to BCP1. Moreover, R7 showed broader range of nitrogen and sulphur sources. Phenotype Microarray data were combined with genomic analysis to genetically support the metabolic features of the two strains. The genome analysis allowed to identify some gene clusters involved in the metabolism of the main tested xenobiotic compounds. Results show that R7 contains multiple genes for the degradation of a large set of aromatic and PAHs compounds, while a lower variability in terms of genes predicted to be involved in aromatic degradation was found in BCP1. This genetic feature can be related to the strong genetic pressure exerted by the two different environment from which the two strains were isolated. According to this, in the BCP1 genome the smo gene cluster involved in the short-chain n-alkanes degradation, is included in one of the unique regions and it is not conserved in the Rhodococcus strains compared in this work. Data obtained underline the great potential of these two Rhodococcus spp. strains for biodegradation and environmental decontamination processes.

Indexed as

Bacterial ProteinsBiodegradation, EnvironmentalGene Expression Regulation, BacterialGenomicsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingMetabolic Networks and PathwaysPhenotypePhylogenyRhodococcusSequence Analysis, DNAXenobioticsBacterial ProteinsXenobiotics

Identifiers

PMID26426997
PMCPMC4591350
OpenAlexW2120606340

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.