ArticleNucleic acids research2016
Impact of donor-recipient phylogenetic distance on bacterial genome transplantation.
Article in Nucleic acids research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 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
40 citing papers in PubMed, 67 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Selection-free whole genome transplantation revives dead microbes.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Capsular polysaccharide of Mycoplasma mycoides subsp. capri contributes to phenotypic diversity promoting distinctive immune responses.PLoS pathogens · 2025Article
- A versatile plug and play bacterial chassis based on a fast-growing Mycoplasma species.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
- The design and engineering of synthetic genomes.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2025Review
- Extracellular vesicles of minimalistic Mollicutes as mediators of immune modulation and horizontal gene transfer.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Functional surface expression of immunoglobulin cleavage systems in a candidate Mycoplasma vaccine chassis.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Convenient synthesis and delivery of a megabase-scale designer accessory chromosome empower biosynthetic capacity.Cell research · 2024Article
- A synthetic biology approach to assemble and reboot clinically relevantMicrobiology spectrum · 2024Article
- An Expanded Genetic Toolbox to Accelerate the Creation ofACS synthetic biology · 2024Article
- Cloning and sequencing analysis of wholeFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Review
- A toolbox for manipulating the genome of the major goat pathogen,Microbiology (Reading, England) · 2024Article
- Combining Fusion of Cells with CRISPR-Cas9 Editing for the Cloning of Large DNA Fragments or Complete Bacterial Genomes in Yeast.ACS synthetic biology · 2023Article
- Gene editing tools for mycoplasmas: references and future directions for efficient genome manipulation.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
- Cross-species microbial genome transfer: a Review.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Review
- SURE editing: combining oligo-recombineering and programmable insertion/deletion of selection markers to efficiently edit the Mycoplasma pneumoniae genome.Nucleic acids research · 2022Article
- Cytoskeletal components can turn wall-less spherical bacteria into kinking helices.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Enzymatic Supercoiling of Bacterial Chromosomes Facilitates Genome Manipulation.ACS synthetic biology · 2022Article
- Genome Editing of Veterinary Relevant Mycoplasmas Using a CRISPR-Cas Base Editor System.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genome transplantation (GT) allows the installation of purified chromosomes into recipient cells, causing the resulting organisms to adopt the genotype and the phenotype conferred by the donor cells. This key process remains a bottleneck in synthetic biology, especially for genome engineering strategies of intractable and economically important microbial species. So far, this process has only been reported using two closely related bacteria, Mycoplasma mycoides subsp. capri (Mmc) and Mycoplasma capricolum subsp. capricolum (Mcap), and the main factors driving the compatibility between a donor genome and a recipient cell are poorly understood. Here, we investigated the impact of the evolutionary distance between donor and recipient species on the efficiency of GT. Using Mcap as the recipient cell, we successfully transplanted the genome of six bacteria belonging to the Spiroplasma phylogenetic group but including species of two distinct genera. Our results demonstrate that GT efficiency is inversely correlated with the phylogenetic distance between donor and recipient bacteria but also suggest that other species-specific barriers to GT exist. This work constitutes an important step toward understanding the cellular factors governing the GT process in order to better define and eventually extend the existing genome compatibility limit.
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.