ArticleThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2020
OmpC regulation differs between ST131 and non-ST131 Escherichia coli clinical isolates and involves differential expression of the small RNA MicC.
Article in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and clinical validation of a CRISPR/Cas9-engineered reporter phage cocktail for rapid detection ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Biofilm Formation in Chicken-Derived Extraintestinal PathogenicAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- The Role of the Hfq Protein in Bacterial Resistance to Antibiotics: A Narrative Review.Microorganisms · 2025Review
- Host and bacterial urine proteomics might predict treatment outcomes for immunotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Article
- What Contributes to the Minimum Inhibitory Concentration? Beyond β-Lactamase Gene Detection in Klebsiella pneumoniae.The Journal of infectious diseases · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVirulence genes and the expression of resistance mechanisms undoubtedly play a role in the successful spread of the pandemic clone Escherichia coli ST131. Porin down-regulation is a chromosomal mechanism associated with antibiotic resistance. Translation of porin proteins can be impacted by modifications in mRNA half-life and the interaction among small RNAs (sRNAs), the porin transcript and the sRNA chaperone Hfq. Modifications in the translatability of porin proteins could impact the fitness and therefore the success of E. coli ST131 isolates in the presence of antibiotic.
objectivesTo identify differences in the translatability of OmpC and OmpF porins for different STs of E. coli by comparing steady-state RNA levels, mRNA half-life, regulatory sRNA expression and protein production.
methodsRNA expression was evaluated using real-time RT-PCR and OmpC mRNA half-life by northern blotting. OmpC, OmpF and Hfq protein levels were evaluated by immunoblotting.
resultsDifferences between ST131 and non-ST131 isolates included: (i) the level of OmpC RNA and protein produced with mRNA expression higher for ST131 but OmpC protein levels lower compared with non-ST131 isolates; (ii) OmpC mRNA half-life (21-30 min for ST131 isolates compared with <2-23 min for non-ST131 isolates); and (iii) levels of the sRNA MicC (2- to 120-fold for ST131 isolates compared with -4- to 70-fold for non-ST131 isolates).
conclusionsMechanisms involved in the translatability of porin proteins differed among different STs of E. coli. These differences could provide a selective advantage to ST131 E. coli when confronted with an antibiotic-rich environment.
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.