Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29299733›Full record

ArticleJournal of industrial microbiology & biotechnology2018

Genetic tools for reliable gene expression and recombineering in Pseudomonas putida.

Taylor B Cook, Jacqueline M Rand, Wasti Nurani, Dylan K Courtney, Sophia A Liu, Brian F Pfleger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of industrial microbiology & biotechnology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 74 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing 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

74 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

14 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

6 authors.

Taylor B CookDepartment of Chemical and Biological Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, USA.
Jacqueline M RandDepartment of Chemical and Biological Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, USA.
Wasti NuraniDepartment of Chemical and Biological Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, USA.
Dylan K CourtneyDepartment of Chemical and Biological Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, USA.
Sophia A LiuDepartment of Chemical and Biological Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, USA.
Brian F PflegerDepartment of Chemical and Biological Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, USA. pfleger@engr.wisc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9232-9959

Funding

BIOTECHNOLOGY TRAINING PROGRAMT32GM008349 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI FOX, BRIAN G · 1989 to 2019
$22.5M
Directorate for Biological Sciences MCB1716594Division of Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and Transport Systems CBET1149678NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM008349USAID 3-195
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pseudomonas putida is a promising bacterial host for producing natural products, such as polyketides and nonribosomal peptides. In these types of projects, researchers need a genetic toolbox consisting of plasmids, characterized promoters, and techniques for rapidly editing the genome. Past reports described constitutive promoter libraries, a suite of broad host range plasmids that replicate in P. putida, and genome-editing methods. To augment those tools, we have characterized a set of inducible promoters and discovered that IPTG-inducible promoter systems have poor dynamic range due to overexpression of the LacI repressor. By replacing the promoter driving lacI expression with weaker promoters, we increased the fold induction of an IPTG-inducible promoter in P. putida KT2440 to 80-fold. Upon discovering that gene expression from a plasmid was unpredictable when using a high-copy mutant of the BBR1 origin, we determined the copy numbers of several broad host range origins and found that plasmid copy numbers are significantly higher in P. putida KT2440 than in the synthetic biology workhorse, Escherichia coli. Lastly, we developed a λRed/Cas9 recombineering method in P. putida KT2440 using the genetic tools that we characterized. This method enabled the creation of scarless mutations without the need for performing classic two-step integration and marker removal protocols that depend on selection and counterselection genes. With the method, we generated four scarless deletions, three of which we were unable to create using a previously established genome-editing technique.

Indexed as

Gene Expression Regulation, BacterialBacterial ProteinsEscherichia coliGene EditingPlasmidsPromoter Regions, GeneticPseudomonas putidaSynthetic BiologyBacterial ProteinsCas9 recombineeringCopy numberLacIPromoterPseudomonas putidaSynthetic biology

Identifiers

PMID29299733
PMCPMC6161825

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.