Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30097647›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Microbiology2018

Archaeal biofilm formation.

Marleen van Wolferen, Alvaro Orell, Sonja-Verena Albers

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Microbiology, 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. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Mechanisms of microbial co-aggregation in mixed anaerobic cultures.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Development and Regulation of the Extreme Biofilm Formation ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  20. TheInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    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

3 authors.

Marleen van WolferenMolecular Biology of Archaea, Institute of Biology II, Microbiology, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Alvaro OrellMax Planck Institute for Terrestrial Microbiology, Marburg, Germany.
Sonja-Verena AlbersMolecular Biology of Archaea, Institute of Biology II, Microbiology, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany. sonja.albers@biologie.uni-freiburg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2459-2226

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biofilms are structured and organized communities of microorganisms that represent one of the most successful forms of life on Earth. Bacterial biofilms have been studied in great detail, and many molecular details are known about the processes that govern bacterial biofilm formation, however, archaea are ubiquitous in almost all habitats on Earth and can also form biofilms. In recent years, insights have been gained into the development of archaeal biofilms, how archaea communicate to form biofilms and how the switch from a free-living lifestyle to a sessile lifestyle is regulated. In this Review, we explore the different stages of archaeal biofilm development and highlight similarities and differences between archaea and bacteria on a molecular level. We also consider the role of archaeal biofilms in industry and their use in different industrial processes.

Indexed as

Bacterial Physiological PhenomenaArchaeaBacteriaBiofilms

Identifiers

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.