ArticleScientific reports2018
Bacterial cell wall nanoimaging by autoblinking microscopy.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing Knowledge Distillation of a Multi-Emitter Localizing Neural Network for Applications in Stochastic Optical Reconstruction Microscopy.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Stress-induced nucleoid remodeling in Deinococcus radiodurans is associated with major changes in Heat Unstable (HU) protein dynamics.Nucleic acids research · 2024Article
- Temporal analysis of relative distances (TARDIS) is a robust, parameter-free alternative to single-particle tracking.Nature methods · 2024Article
- Single-molecule tracking of PprI inFrontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Metabolic biorthogonal labeling and dSTORM imaging of peptidoglycan synthesis inSTAR protocols · 2021Article
- Enzyme-targeted fluorescent small-molecule probes for bacterial imaging.Current opinion in chemical biology · 2020Review
- Cell morphology and nucleoid dynamics in dividing Deinococcus radiodurans.Nature communications · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spurious blinking fluorescent spots are often seen in bacteria during single-molecule localization microscopy experiments. Although this 'autoblinking' phenomenon is widespread, its origin remains unclear. In Deinococcus strains, we observed particularly strong autoblinking at the periphery of the bacteria, facilitating its comprehensive characterization. A systematic evaluation of the contributions of different components of the sample environment to autoblinking levels and the in-depth analysis of the photophysical properties of autoblinking molecules indicate that the phenomenon results from transient binding of fluorophores originating mostly from the growth medium to the bacterial cell wall, which produces single-molecule fluorescence through a Point Accumulation for Imaging in Nanoscale Topography (PAINT) mechanism. Our data suggest that the autoblinking molecules preferentially bind to the plasma membrane of bacterial cells. Autoblinking microscopy was used to acquire nanoscale images of live, unlabeled D. radiodurans and could be combined with PALM imaging of PAmCherry-labeled bacteria in two-color experiments. Autoblinking-based super-resolved images provided insight into the formation of septa in dividing bacteria and revealed heterogeneities in the distribution and dynamics of autoblinking molecules within the cell wall.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.