Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28961755›Full record

ReviewFEMS microbiology reviews2017

Thinking big: the tunability of bacterial cell size.

Spencer Cesar, Kerwyn Casey Huang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in FEMS microbiology reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Microbiome modeling: a beginner's guide.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. In Situ Delivery and Production System (Journal of personalized medicine · 2021
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Fitness and Productivity Increase with Ecotypic Diversity amongApplied and environmental microbiology · 2020
    Article
  18. Constructing and deconstructing the bacterial cell wall.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2020
    Review
  19. Rod width under control.Nature microbiology · 2019
    Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

Spencer CesarDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Kerwyn Casey HuangDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.

Funding

TRAINING & OUTREACH COREP50GM107615 · NIGMS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI FERRELL, JAMES E. · 2013 to 2017
$10.9M
NIGMS NIH HHS P50 GM107615
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The determination of cell size is a fundamental challenge for all living organisms. In a given growth condition, cell size for a particular bacterial species typically falls within a narrow distribution. Nonetheless, size can vary enormously across species, and the size of a single bacterium can even vary substantially across growth conditions. Recent phenomenological studies have revived classic interest in how cells maintain their size and how they adjust their size with changes in growth rate. However, the mechanisms by which cells establish a particular size are relatively enigmatic. Here, we review existing knowledge on how size in rod-shaped bacteria is shaped by nutrient, mechanical, and genetic factors. We also examine obstacles to accurate size measurement and recent technologies that help to overcome these hurdles. Finally, we discuss the relevance of cell size to bacterial physiology.

Indexed as

Bacterial Physiological PhenomenaBacteriabacteriacell sizecell wallmorphologyMreBsystems biology

Identifiers

PMID28961755
PMCPMC5812501

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.