ArticleMicrobiologyOpen2019
Comparative genomics of the Komagataeibacter strains-Efficient bionanocellulose producers.
Article in MicrobiologyOpen, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 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
46 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bioengineering microbial cellulose synthesis pathways as biofactory for industrial-scale cellulose production: a review on current advances.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2026Review
- Diverse Horizontally Transferred Cellulose Biosynthesis Gene Clusters inMicroorganisms · 2026Article
- Bacterial nanocellulose: biosynthesis, structural properties and vascular tissue engineering applications.Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Comparative Analysis of Lineage Structure, Cellulose Locus Context, and Mobilome Diversity Across CompleteMicroorganisms · 2026Article
- Exploring Genome-Wide Mutation Dynamics and Bacterial Cellulose Impairment inComputational and structural biotechnology journal · 2026Article
- Transcriptional reprogramming of Novacetimonas hansenii SI1 during growth on glycerol.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Complete genome analysis of the cellulose producing strain Komagataeibacter sucrofermentans SMEG01.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Transparent 3-Layered Bacterial Nanocellulose as a Multicompartment and Biomimetic Scaffold for Co-Culturing Cells.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2025Article
- Self-pigmenting textiles grown from cellulose-producing bacteria with engineered tyrosinase expression.Nature biotechnology · 2025Article
- Isolation and Characterization ofMicroorganisms · 2025Article
- Enzymatic functionalization of bacterial nanocellulose: current approaches and future prospects.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2025Review
- Impact and applications of cyclic di-GMP second messenger signaling in biotechnology and medicine.Sustainable microbiology · 2025Review
- Optimization of Citrus Pulp Waste-Based Medium for Improved Bacterial Nanocellulose Production.Microorganisms · 2024Article
- Whole genome sequencing analysis of Komagataeibacter nataicola reveals its potential in food waste valorisation for cellulose production.Molecular biology reports · 2024Article
- From Nature to Lab: Sustainable Bacterial Cellulose Production and Modification with Synthetic Biology.Polymers · 2023Review
- Exopolysaccharides Producing Bacteria: A Review.Microorganisms · 2023Review
- Characterization, genome analysis and genetic tractability studies of a new nanocellulose producing Komagataeibacter intermedius isolate.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Bacterial Cellulose-Based Polymer Nanocomposites: A Review.Polymers · 2022Review
- Characterization of the Putative Acylated Cellulose Synthase Operon inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Komagataeibacter species are well-recognized bionanocellulose (BNC) producers. This bacterial genus, formerly assigned to Gluconacetobacter, is known for its phenotypic diversity manifested by strain-dependent carbon source preference, BNC production rate, pellicle structure, and strain stability. Here, we performed a comparative study of nineteen Komagataeibacter genomes, three of which were newly contributed in this work. We defined the core genome of the genus, clarified phylogenetic relationships among strains, and provided genetic evidence for the distinction between the two major clades, the K. xylinus and the K. hansenii. We found genomic traits, which likely contribute to the phenotypic diversity between the Komagataeibacter strains. These features include genome flexibility, carbohydrate uptake and regulation of its metabolism, exopolysaccharides synthesis, and the c-di-GMP signaling network. In addition, this work provides a comprehensive functional annotation of carbohydrate metabolism pathways, such as those related to glucose, glycerol, acetan, levan, and cellulose. Findings of this multi-genomic study expand understanding of the genetic variation within the Komagataeibacter genus and facilitate exploiting of its full potential for bionanocellulose production at the industrial scale.
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.