Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31556183›Full record

ReviewMolecular microbiology2019

Monoderm bacteria: the new frontier for type IV pilus biology.

Vladimir Pelicic

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular microbiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Characterization of a glycan-binding complex of minor pilins completes the analysis ofProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. PilB fromProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. The Role of Minor Pilins in Assembly and Function of the Competence Pilus ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Vladimir PelicicMRC Centre for Molecular Bacteriology and Infection, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9456-4995
Imperial College London · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/L008408/1Medical Research Council MR/P022197/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the diverse world of bacterial pili, type IV pili (Tfp) are unique for two reasons: their multifunctionality and ubiquity. This latter feature offers an extraordinary possibility, that is, to perform comparative studies in evolutionarily distant species in order to improve our fragmentary understanding of Tfp biology. Regrettably, such potential has remained largely untapped, because, for 20 years, Tfp have only been characterised in diderm bacteria. However, recent studies of Tfp in monoderms have started closing the gap, revealing many interesting commonalities and a few significant differences, extending the frontiers of knowledge of Tfp biology. Here, I review the current state of the art of the Tfp field in monoderm bacteria and discuss resulting implications for our general understanding of the assembly and function of these widespread filamentous nanomachines.

Indexed as

BacteriaBacterial ProteinsEubacterialesFimbriae, BacterialFimbriae ProteinsGram-Positive BacteriaMembrane ProteinsStreptococcusStreptococcus sanguisBacterial ProteinsFimbriae ProteinsMembrane Proteins

Identifiers

PMID31556183
PMCPMC6916266
OpenAlexW2975114048

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.