Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28468277›Full record

ReviewMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2017

Sampling Terrestrial Environments for Bacterial Polyketides.

Patrick Hill, Graham W Heberlig, Christopher N Boddy

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Metagenomics UnveilsmSystems · 2021
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

3 authors.

Patrick HillDepartment of Biology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada. phill@uottawa.ca.
Graham W HeberligDepartment of Chemistry and Biomolecular Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada. ghebe104@uottawa.ca.
Christopher N BoddyDepartment of Biology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada. cboddy@uottawa.ca.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacterial polyketides are highly biologically active molecules that are frequently used as drugs, particularly as antibiotics and anticancer agents, thus the discovery of new polyketides is of major interest. Since the 1980s discovery of polyketides has slowed dramatically due in large part to the repeated rediscovery of known compounds. While recent scientific and technical advances have improved our ability to discover new polyketides, one key area has been under addressed, namely the distribution of polyketide-producing bacteria in the environment. Identifying environments where producing bacteria are abundant and diverse should improve our ability to discover (bioprospect) new polyketides. This review summarizes for the bioprospector the state-of-the-field in terrestrial microbial ecology. It provides insight into the scientific and technical challenges limiting the application of microbial ecology discoveries for bioprospecting and summarizes key developments in the field that will enable more effective bioprospecting. The major recent efforts by researchers to sample new environments for polyketide discovery is also reviewed and key emerging environments such as insect associated bacteria, desert soils, disease suppressive soils, and caves are highlighted. Finally strategies for taking and characterizing terrestrial samples to help maximize discovery efforts are proposed and the inclusion of non-actinomycetal bacteria in any terrestrial discovery strategy is recommended.

Indexed as

Environmental MicrobiologyAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsDrug DiscoveryGenes, BacterialHumansInsectaMolecular TypingPolyketidesAnti-Bacterial AgentsPolyketidesbioprospectingmicrobial ecologypolyketides

Identifiers

PMID28468277
PMCPMC6154731

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.