Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28165005›Full record

ArticleNature communications2017

Killing by Type VI secretion drives genetic phase separation and correlates with increased cooperation.

Luke McNally, Eryn Bernardy, Jacob Thomas, Arben Kalziqi, Jennifer Pentz, Sam P Brown, Brian K Hammer, Peter J Yunker, William C Ratcliff

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
83citing 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

83 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Overcoming toxicity: How nonantagonistic microbes manage to thrive in boom-and-bust environments.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Multiplicity of type 6 secretion system toxins limits the evolution of resistance.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Polymicrobial interactions betweenbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

23 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

9 authors.

Luke McNallyCentre for Immunity, Infection and Evolution, School of Biological Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3FL, UK.
Eryn BernardySchool of Biological Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology. Atlanta, Georgia 30332, USA.
Jacob ThomasSchool of Biological Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology. Atlanta, Georgia 30332, USA.
Arben KalziqiSchool of Physics, Georgia Institute of Technology. Atlanta, Georgia 30332, USA.
Jennifer PentzSchool of Biological Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology. Atlanta, Georgia 30332, USA.
Sam P BrownSchool of Biological Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology. Atlanta, Georgia 30332, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1892-9275
Brian K HammerSchool of Biological Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology. Atlanta, Georgia 30332, USA.
Peter J YunkerSchool of Physics, Georgia Institute of Technology. Atlanta, Georgia 30332, USA.
William C RatcliffSchool of Biological Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology. Atlanta, Georgia 30332, USA.

Funding

NASA NNX15AR33GWellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

By nature of their small size, dense growth and frequent need for extracellular metabolism, microbes face persistent public goods dilemmas. Genetic assortment is the only general solution stabilizing cooperation, but all known mechanisms structuring microbial populations depend on the availability of free space, an often unrealistic constraint. Here we describe a class of self-organization that operates within densely packed bacterial populations. Through mathematical modelling and experiments with Vibrio cholerae, we show how killing adjacent competitors via the Type VI secretion system (T6SS) precipitates phase separation via the 'Model A' universality class of order-disorder transition mediated by killing. We mathematically demonstrate that T6SS-mediated killing should favour the evolution of public goods cooperation, and empirically support this prediction using a phylogenetic comparative analysis. This work illustrates the twin role played by the T6SS, dealing death to local competitors while simultaneously creating conditions potentially favouring the evolution of cooperation with kin.

Indexed as

AntibiosisBacterial ProteinsBiological EvolutionComputational BiologyGene Expression Regulation, BacterialGenome, BacterialModels, BiologicalPhylogenyType VI Secretion SystemsVibrio choleraeBacterial ProteinsType VI Secretion Systems

Identifiers

PMID28165005
PMCPMC5303878

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.