ArticleBiology direct2016
The mysterious orphans of Mycoplasmataceae.
Article in Biology direct, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microbiome variation at the clam-sediment interface may explain changes in local productivity of Chamelea gallina in the North Adriatic sea.BMC microbiology · 2023Article
- Article
- Comparative Analysis ofFrontiers in genetics · 2018Article
- No Evidence for Phylostratigraphic Bias Impacting Inferences on Patterns of Gene Emergence and Evolution.Molecular biology and evolution · 2017Article
- Discovery of numerous novel small genes in the intergenic regions of the Escherichia coli O157:H7 Sakai genome.PloS one · 2017Article
- Horizontally Acquired Genes Are Often Shared between Closely Related Bacterial Species.Frontiers in microbiology · 2017Article
- Nucleotide diversity analysis highlights functionally important genomic regions.Scientific reports · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe length of a protein sequence is largely determined by its function. In certain species, it may be also affected by additional factors, such as growth temperature or acidity. In 2002, it was shown that in the bacterium Escherichia coli and in the archaeon Archaeoglobus fulgidus, protein sequences with no homologs were, on average, shorter than those with homologs (BMC Evol Biol 2:20, 2002). It is now generally accepted that in bacterial and archaeal genomes the distributions of protein length are different between sequences with and without homologs. In this study, we examine this postulate by conducting a comprehensive analysis of all annotated prokaryotic genomes and by focusing on certain exceptions.
resultsWe compared the distribution of lengths of "having homologs proteins" (HHPs) and "non-having homologs proteins" (orphans or ORFans) in all currently completely sequenced and COG-annotated prokaryotic genomes. As expected, the HHPs and ORFans have strikingly different length distributions in almost all genomes. As previously established, the HHPs, indeed are, on average, longer than the ORFans, and the length distributions for the ORFans have a relatively narrow peak, in contrast to the HHPs, whose lengths spread over a wider range of values. However, about thirty genomes do not obey these rules. Practically all genomes of Mycoplasma and Ureaplasma have atypical ORFans distributions, with the mean lengths of ORFan larger than the mean lengths of HHPs. These genera constitute over 80 % of atypical genomes.
conclusionsWe confirmed on a ubiquitous set of genomes that the previous observation of HHPs and ORFans have different gene length distributions. We also showed that Mycoplasmataceae genomes have very distinctive distributions of ORFans lengths. We offer several possible biological explanations of this phenomenon, such as an adaptation to Mycoplasmataceae's ecological niche, specifically its "quiet" co-existence with host organisms, resulting in long ABC transporters.
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.