Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26538447›Full record

ArticleBMC bioinformatics2015

Revisiting operons: an analysis of the landscape of transcriptional units in E. coli.

Xizeng Mao, Qin Ma, Bingqiang Liu, Xin Chen, Hanyuan Zhang, Ying Xu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Exopolysaccharide Biosynthesis inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  8. Genome-wide promoter assembly inGenome research · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. The Transcription Unit Architecture ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2019
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Xizeng MaoComputational Systems Biology Lab, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, and Institute of Bioinformatics, University of Georgia, Athens, USA. xizeng.mao@gmail.com.
Qin MaComputational Systems Biology Lab, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, and Institute of Bioinformatics, University of Georgia, Athens, USA. qin.ma@sdstate.edu.
Bingqiang LiuSchool of Mathematics, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong, China. bingqiangsdu@gmail.com.
Xin ChenComputational Systems Biology Lab, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, and Institute of Bioinformatics, University of Georgia, Athens, USA. chenxin@uga.edu.
Hanyuan ZhangComputational Systems Biology Lab, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, and Institute of Bioinformatics, University of Georgia, Athens, USA. jluzhhy@gmail.com.
Ying XuComputational Systems Biology Lab, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, and Institute of Bioinformatics, University of Georgia, Athens, USA. xyn@bmb.uga.edu.
University of Georgia · USBioenergy Life Science (United States) · USShandong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBacterial operons are considerably more complex than what were thought. At least their components are dynamically rather than statically defined as previously assumed. Here we present a computational study of the landscape of the transcriptional units (TUs) of E. coli K12, revealed by the available genomic and transcriptomic data, providing new understanding about the complexity of TUs as a whole encoded in the genome of E. coli K12. RESULTS AND

conclusionOur main findings include that (i) different TUs may overlap with each other by sharing common genes, giving rise to clusters of overlapped TUs (TUCs) along the genomic sequence; (ii) the intergenic regions in front of the first gene of each TU tend to have more conserved sequence motifs than those of the other genes inside the TU, suggesting that TUs each have their own promoters; (iii) the terminators associated with the 3' ends of TUCs tend to be Rho-independent terminators, substantially more often than terminators of TUs that end inside a TUC; and (iv) the functional relatedness of adjacent gene pairs in individual TUs is higher than those in TUCs, suggesting that individual TUs are more basic functional units than TUCs.

Indexed as

Transcription, GeneticBinding SitesConserved SequenceEscherichia coli K12Escherichia coli ProteinsGenes, BacterialNucleotide MotifsOperonPromoter Regions, GeneticRegulonTerminator Regions, GeneticTranscription FactorsEscherichia coli ProteinsRho protein, E coliTranscription Factors

Identifiers

PMID26538447
PMCPMC4634151
OpenAlexW2109203567

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.