Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28968546›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in microbiology2018

Transcription fidelity and its roles in the cell.

Pamela Gamba, Nikolay Zenkin

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in microbiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Kinetic mechanisms for the sequence dependence of transcriptional errors.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Innovation versus novelty in microbial systems.Environmental microbiology · 2023
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Transcriptional frameshifts contribute to protein allergenicity.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. 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.

Pamela GambaCentre for Bacterial Cell Biology, Institute for Cell and Molecular Biosciences, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE2 4AX, UK. Electronic address: pamela.gamba2@ncl.ac.uk.
Nikolay ZenkinCentre for Bacterial Cell Biology, Institute for Cell and Molecular Biosciences, Newcastle University, Baddiley-Clark Building, Richardson Road, Newcastle Upon Tyne NE2 4AX, UK. Electronic address: nikolay.zenkin@ncl.ac.uk.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/L010003/1Wellcome Trust 102851
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accuracy of transcription is essential for productive gene expression, and the past decade has brought new understanding of the mechanisms ensuring transcription fidelity. The discovery of a new catalytic domain, the Trigger Loop, revealed that RNA polymerase can actively choose the correct substrates. Also, the intrinsic proofreading activity was found to proceed via a ribozyme-like mechanism, whereby the erroneous nucleoside triphosphate (NTP) helps its own excision. Factor-assisted proofreading was shown to proceed through an exchange of active centres, a unique phenomenon among proteinaceous enzymes. Furthermore, most recent in vivo studies have revised the roles of transcription accuracy and proofreading factors, as not only required for production of errorless RNAs, but also for prevention of frequent misincorporation-induced pausing that may cause conflicts with fellow RNA polymerases and the replication machinery.

Indexed as

Transcription, GeneticCatalytic DomainDNA-Directed RNA PolymerasesModels, MolecularRNADNA-Directed RNA PolymerasesRNA

Identifiers

PMID28968546
PMCPMC5904569

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.