ArticleMicrobiologyOpen2019
Microfluidic time-lapse analysis and reevaluation of the Bacillus subtilis cell cycle.
Article in MicrobiologyOpen, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bacterial single-cell RNA sequencing captures biofilm transcriptional heterogeneity and differential responses to immune pressure.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Recollections of a Helmstetter Disciple.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Growth rate is modulated by monitoring cell wall precursors in Bacillus subtilis.Nature microbiology · 2023Article
- Length-based separation ofMicrosystems & nanoengineering · 2022Article
- Genome-Scale Reconstruction of Microbial Dynamic Phenotype: Successes and Challenges.Microorganisms · 2021Review
- Cohesion of Sister Chromosome Termini during the Early Stages of Sporulation in Bacillus subtilis.Journal of bacteriology · 2020Article
- Geometric principles underlying the proliferation of a model cell system.Nature communications · 2020Article
- Article
- Microfluidic time-lapse analysis and reevaluation of the Bacillus subtilis cell cycle.MicrobiologyOpen · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Recent studies taking advantage of automated single-cell time-lapse analysis have reignited interest in the bacterial cell cycle. Several studies have highlighted alternative models, such as Sizer and Adder, which differ essentially in relation to whether cells can measure their present size or their amount of growth since birth. Most of the recent work has been done with Escherichia coli. We set out to study the well-characterized Gram-positive bacterium, Bacillus subtilis, at the single-cell level, using an accurate fluorescent marker for division as well as a marker for completion of chromosome replication. Our results are consistent with the Adder model in both fast and slow growth conditions tested, and with Sizer but only at the slower growth rate. We also find that cell size variation arises not only from the expected variation in size at division but also that division site offset from mid-cell contributes to a significant degree. Finally, although traditional cell cycle models imply a strong connection between the termination of a round of replication and subsequent division, we find that at the single-cell level these events are largely disconnected.
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.