Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29856930›Full record

ReviewAnnual review of microbiology2018

The Clash of Macromolecular Titans: Replication-Transcription Conflicts in Bacteria.

Kevin S Lang, Houra Merrikh

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annual review of microbiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing 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

51 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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.

Kevin S LangDepartment of Microbiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, USA; email: merrikh@uw.edu.
Houra MerrikhDepartment of Microbiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, USA; email: merrikh@uw.edu.

Funding

INTERDISCIPLINARY PROGRAM IN BACTERIAL PATHOGENESIST32AI055396 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI FANG, FERRIC C · 2003 to 2019
$2.8M
Targeted Gene Evolution via Replication-Transcription ConflictsDP2GM110773 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI MERRIKH, HOURA · 2013 to 2013
$2.2M
NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI055396NIGMS NIH HHS DP2 GM110773
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Within the last decade, it has become clear that DNA replication and transcription are routinely in conflict with each other in growing cells. Much of the seminal work on this topic has been carried out in bacteria, specifically, Escherichia coli and Bacillus subtilis; therefore, studies of conflicts in these species deserve special attention. Collectively, the recent findings on conflicts have fundamentally changed the way we think about DNA replication in vivo. Furthermore, new insights on this topic have revealed that the conflicts between replication and transcription significantly influence many key parameters of cellular function, including genome organization, mutagenesis, and evolution of stress response and virulence genes. In this review, we discuss the consequences of replication-transcription conflicts on the life of bacteria and describe some key strategies cells use to resolve them. We put special emphasis on two critical aspects of these encounters: ( a) the consequences of conflicts on replisome stability and dynamics, and ( b) the resulting increase in spontaneous mutagenesis.

Indexed as

DNA ReplicationTranscription, GeneticBacillus subtilisEscherichia coliDNA replication, transcriptionreplication-transcription conflicts

Identifiers

PMID29856930
PMCPMC6233710

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.