Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31097593›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2019

Systematic evasion of the restriction-modification barrier in bacteria.

Christopher D Johnston, Sean L Cotton, Susan R Rittling, Jacqueline R Starr, Gary G Borisy, Floyd E Dewhirst, Katherine P Lemon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing 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

66 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Genetic engineering ofMicrobial genomics · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. An ISFrontiers in microbiology · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. UsingACS synthetic biology · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Highly efficient CRISPR-Cas9 base editing inApplied and environmental microbiology · 2025
    Article

6 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

7 authors.

Christopher D JohnstonVaccine and Infectious Disease Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA 98109; johnston@fredhutch.org gborisy@forsyth.org.
Sean L CottonThe Forsyth Institute, Cambridge, MA 02142.
Susan R RittlingThe Forsyth Institute, Cambridge, MA 02142.
Jacqueline R StarrThe Forsyth Institute, Cambridge, MA 02142.
Gary G BorisyThe Forsyth Institute, Cambridge, MA 02142; johnston@fredhutch.org gborisy@forsyth.org.ORCID 0000-0002-0266-8018
Floyd E DewhirstThe Forsyth Institute, Cambridge, MA 02142.
Katherine P LemonThe Forsyth Institute, Cambridge, MA 02142.ORCID 0000-0003-1542-1679

Funding

Spatial Organization of the Oral MicrobiomeR01DE022586 · NIDCR · MARINE BIOLOGICAL LABORATORY · PI Jessica Leigh Mark Welch · 2013 to 2026
$8.7M
Mouse Oral Microbiome DatabaseR37DE016937 · NIDCR · ADA FORSYTH INSTITUTE, INC. · PI DEWHIRST, FLOYD E · 2011 to 2020
$8.6M
Cultivation, Nature, Ecology and Pathogenicity of the Uncultivable Oral MicrobiomR01DE024468 · NIDCR · ADA FORSYTH INSTITUTE, INC. · PI ALM, ERIC JOHN, DEWHIRST, FLOYD E · 2014 to 2018
$7.3M
The SyngenicDNA and μPOET Platform: Overcoming Innate Barriers to Genetic Engineering in Bacteria.R01DE027850 · NIDCR · FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER · PI JOHNSTON, CHRISTOPHER D · 2017 to 2021
$4.9M
Antibiotics from nose and throat commensals that impact pathogen colonizationR01AI101018 · NIAID · BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE · PI FISCHBACH, MICHAEL ANDREW, LEMON, KATHERINE PAIGE · 2012 to 2021
$4.4M
NIAID NIH HHS R01 AI101018NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE022586NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE027850NIDCR NIH HHS R37 DE016937
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacteria that are recalcitrant to genetic manipulation using modern in vitro techniques are termed genetically intractable. Genetic intractability is a fundamental barrier to progress that hinders basic, synthetic, and translational microbiology research and development beyond a few model organisms. The most common underlying causes of genetic intractability are restriction-modification (RM) systems, ubiquitous defense mechanisms against xenogeneic DNA that hinder the use of genetic approaches in the vast majority of bacteria and exhibit strain-level variation. Here, we describe a systematic approach to overcome RM systems. Our approach was inspired by a simple hypothesis: if a synthetic piece of DNA lacks the highly specific target recognition motifs for a host's RM systems, then it is invisible to these systems and will not be degraded during artificial transformation. Accordingly, in this process, we determine the genome and methylome of an individual bacterial strain and use this information to define the bacterium's RM target motifs. We then synonymously eliminate RM targets from the nucleotide sequence of a genetic tool in silico, synthesize an RM-silent "SyngenicDNA" tool, and propagate the tool as minicircle plasmids, termed SyMPL (SyngenicDNA Minicircle Plasmid) tools, before transformation. In a proof-of-principle of our approach, we demonstrate a profound improvement (five orders of magnitude) in the transformation of a clinically relevant USA300 strain of

Indexed as

DNA, BacterialDNA Restriction-Modification EnzymesEscherichia coliGenetic TechniquesPlasmidsStaphylococcus aureusDNA, BacterialDNA Restriction-Modification Enzymesgenetic intractabilityminicirclerestriction modificationSyngenicDNAtransformation

Identifiers

PMID31097593
PMCPMC6561282

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.