Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26728194›Full record

ArticleJournal of bacteriology2016

Robustness of the Process of Nucleoid Exclusion of Protein Aggregates in Escherichia coli.

Ramakanth Neeli-Venkata, Antti Martikainen, Abhishekh Gupta, Nadia Gonçalves, Jose Fonseca, Andre S Ribeiro

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of bacteriology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Update on the Protein Homeostasis Network inFrontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Protein aggregation in bacteria.FEMS microbiology reviews · 2020
    Review
  8. Microbial ageing and longevity.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2019
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ramakanth Neeli-VenkataLaboratory of Biosystem Dynamics, Department of Signal Processing, Tampere University of Technology, Tampere, Finland.
Antti MartikainenLaboratory of Biosystem Dynamics, Department of Signal Processing, Tampere University of Technology, Tampere, Finland.
Abhishekh GuptaLaboratory of Biosystem Dynamics, Department of Signal Processing, Tampere University of Technology, Tampere, Finland.
Nadia GonçalvesLaboratory of Biosystem Dynamics, Department of Signal Processing, Tampere University of Technology, Tampere, Finland.
Jose FonsecaUNINOVA, Instituto de Desenvolvimento de Novas Tecnologias, Campus FCT-UNL, Caparica, Portugal.
Andre S RibeiroLaboratory of Biosystem Dynamics, Department of Signal Processing, Tampere University of Technology, Tampere, Finland andre.ribeiro@tut.fi.
Tampere University · FIUninova · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

unlabelledEscherichia coli segregates protein aggregates to the poles by nucleoid exclusion. Combined with cell divisions, this generates heterogeneous aggregate distributions in subsequent cell generations. We studied the robustness of this process with differing medium richness and antibiotics stress, which affect nucleoid size, using multimodal, time-lapse microscopy of live cells expressing both a fluorescently tagged chaperone (IbpA), which identifies in vivo the location of aggregates, and HupA-mCherry, a fluorescent variant of a nucleoid-associated protein. We find that the relative sizes of the nucleoid's major and minor axes change widely, in a positively correlated fashion, with medium richness and antibiotic stress. The aggregate's distribution along the major cell axis also changes between conditions and in agreement with the nucleoid exclusion phenomenon. Consequently, the fraction of aggregates at the midcell region prior to cell division differs between conditions, which will affect the degree of asymmetries in the partitioning of aggregates between cells of future generations. Finally, from the location of the peak of anisotropy in the aggregate displacement distribution, the nucleoid relative size, and the spatiotemporal aggregate distribution, we find that the exclusion of detectable aggregates from midcell is most pronounced in cells with mid-sized nucleoids, which are most common under optimal conditions. We conclude that the aggregate management mechanisms of E. coli are significantly robust but are not immune to stresses due to the tangible effect that these have on nucleoid size. IMPORTANCE: Escherichia coli segregates protein aggregates to the poles by nucleoid exclusion. From live single-cell microscopy studies of the robustness of this process to various stresses known to affect nucleoid size, we find that nucleoid size and aggregate preferential locations change concordantly between conditions. Also, the degree of influence of the nucleoid on aggregate positioning differs between conditions, causing aggregate numbers at midcell to differ in cell division events, which will affect the degree of asymmetries in the partitioning of aggregates between cells of future generations. Finally, we find that aggregate segregation to the cell poles is most pronounced in cells with mid-sized nucleoids. We conclude that the energy-free process of the midcell exclusion of aggregates partially loses effectiveness under stressful conditions.

Indexed as

Cell DivisionProtein AggregatesEscherichia coliEscherichia coli ProteinsGenes, ReporterLuminescent ProteinsMicroscopy, FluorescenceStaining and LabelingTime-Lapse ImagingEscherichia coli ProteinsLuminescent ProteinsProtein Aggregates

Identifiers

PMID26728194
PMCPMC4772596
OpenAlexW2229236079

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.