ArticlePloS one2015
Genomic and Gene-Expression Comparisons among Phage-Resistant Type-IV Pilus Mutants of Pseudomonas syringae pathovar phaseolicola.
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 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
- Molecular Characterization and Taxonomic Assignment of Three Phage Isolates from a Collection InfectingViruses · 2021Article
- Phage biocontrol to combat Pseudomonas syringae pathogens causing disease in cherry.Microbial biotechnology · 2020Article
- Bacteriophage-Insensitive Mutants of Antimicrobial-ResistantInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
- Efficiency of Phage φ6 for Biocontrol ofMicroorganisms · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pseudomonas syringae pv. phaseolicola (Pph) is a significant bacterial pathogen of agricultural crops, and phage Φ6 and other members of the dsRNA virus family Cystoviridae undergo lytic (virulent) infection of Pph, using the type IV pilus as the initial site of cellular attachment. Despite the popularity of Pph/phage Φ6 as a model system in evolutionary biology, Pph resistance to phage Φ6 remains poorly characterized. To investigate differences between phage Φ6 resistant Pph strains, we examined genomic and gene expression variation among three bacterial genotypes that differ in the number of type IV pili expressed per cell: ordinary (wild-type), non-piliated, and super-piliated. Genome sequencing of non-piliated and super-piliated Pph identified few mutations that separate these genotypes from wild type Pph--and none present in genes known to be directly involved in type IV pilus expression. Expression analysis revealed that 81.1% of gene ontology (GO) terms up-regulated in the non-piliated strain were down-regulated in the super-piliated strain. This differential expression is particularly prevalent in genes associated with respiration--specifically genes in the tricarboxylic acid cycle (TCA) cycle, aerobic respiration, and acetyl-CoA metabolism. The expression patterns of the TCA pathway appear to be generally up and down-regulated, in non-piliated and super-piliated Pph respectively. As pilus retraction is mediated by an ATP motor, loss of retraction ability might lead to a lower energy draw on the bacterial cell, leading to a different energy balance than wild type. The lower metabolic rate of the super-piliated strain is potentially a result of its loss of ability to retract.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.