Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27412881›Full record

ReviewMicrobiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR2016

Evolutionary Ecology of Prokaryotic Immune Mechanisms.

Stineke van Houte, Angus Buckling, Edze R Westra

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 158 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
158citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

158 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

98 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Stineke van HouteESI and CEC, Department of Biosciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Angus BucklingESI and CEC, Department of Biosciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Edze R WestraESI and CEC, Department of Biosciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom westra.edze@gmail.com.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilWellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacteria have a range of distinct immune strategies that provide protection against bacteriophage (phage) infections. While much has been learned about the mechanism of action of these defense strategies, it is less clear why such diversity in defense strategies has evolved. In this review, we discuss the short- and long-term costs and benefits of the different resistance strategies and, hence, the ecological conditions that are likely to favor the different strategies alone and in combination. Finally, we discuss some of the broader consequences, beyond resistance to phage and other genetic elements, resulting from the operation of different immune strategies.

Indexed as

BacteriaBacteriophagesCRISPR-Cas SystemsEvolution, MolecularHost-Pathogen InteractionsReceptors, VirusReceptors, Virus

Identifiers

PMID27412881
PMCPMC4981670

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.