ArticlePloS one2019
Kinetics of the thermal inactivation and the refolding of bacterial luciferases in Bacillus subtilis and in Escherichia coli differ.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Observation of Cytotoxicity of Phosphonium Derivatives Is Explained: Metabolism Inhibition and Adhesion Alteration.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- Anti-Inflammatory Activity of Soluble Epoxide Hydrolase Inhibitors Based on Selenoureas Bearing an Adamantane Moiety.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Constructing ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Here we present a study of the thermal inactivation and the refolding of the proteins in Gram positive Bacillus subtilis. To enable use of bacterial luciferases as the models for protein thermal inactivation and refolding in B. subtilis cells, we developed a variety of bright luminescent B. subtilis strains which express luxAB genes encoding luciferases of differing thermolability. The kinetics of the thermal inactivation and the refolding of luciferases from Photorhabdus luminescens and Photobacterium leiognathi were compared in Gram negative and Gram positive bacteria. In B. subtilis cells, these luciferases are substantially more thermostable than in Escherichia coli. Thermal inactivation of the thermostable luciferase P. luminescens in B. subtilis at 48.5°С behaves as a first-order reaction. In E.coli, the first order rate constant (Kt) of the thermal inactivation of luciferase in E. coli exceeds that observed in B. subtilis cells 2.9 times. Incubation time dependence curves for the thermal inactivation of the thermolabile luciferase of P. leiognathi luciferase in the cells of E. coli and B. subtilis may be described by first and third order kinetics, respectively. Here we shown that the levels and the rates of refolding of thermally inactivated luciferases in B. subtilis cells are substantially lower that that observed in E. coli. In dnaK-negative strains of B. subtilis, both the rates of thermal inactivation and the efficiency of refolding are similar to that observed in wild-type strains. These experiments point that the role that DnaKJE plays in thermostability of luciferases may be limited to bacterial species resembling E. coli.
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.