Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34917040›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2021

Calculation and Interpretation of Substrate Assimilation Rates in Microbial Cells Based on Isotopic Composition Data Obtained by nanoSIMS.

Lubos Polerecky, Meri Eichner, Takako Masuda, Tomáš Zavřel, Sophie Rabouille, Douglas A Campbell, Kimberly Halsey

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Polyphosphate Dynamics in Cable Bacteria.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

Lubos PolereckyDepartment of Earth Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Meri EichnerInstitute of Microbiology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Centre Algatech, Třeboň, Czechia.
Takako MasudaInstitute of Microbiology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Centre Algatech, Třeboň, Czechia.
Tomáš ZavřelGlobal Change Research Institute, Czech Academy of Sciences, Brno, Czechia.
Sophie RabouilleSorbonne Université, CNRS, Laboratoire d'Océanographie de Villefranche, LOV, Villefranche-sur-mer, France.
Douglas A CampbellDepartment of Biology, Mount Allison University, Sackville, NB, Canada.
Kimberly HalseyDepartment of Microbiology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, United States.
Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Microbiology · CZCzech Academy of Sciences, Global Change Research Institute · CZLaboratoire d'Océanographie Microbienne · FRMount Allison University · CAOregon State University · USUtrecht University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stable isotope probing (SIP) combined with nano-scale secondary ion mass spectrometry (nanoSIMS) is a powerful approach to quantify assimilation rates of elements such as C and N into individual microbial cells. Here, we use mathematical modeling to investigate how the derived rate estimates depend on the model used to describe substrate assimilation by a cell during a SIP incubation. We show that the most commonly used model, which is based on the simplifying assumptions of linearly increasing biomass of individual cells over time and no cell division, can yield underestimated assimilation rates when compared to rates derived from a model that accounts for cell division. This difference occurs because the isotopic labeling of a dividing cell increases more rapidly over time compared to a non-dividing cell and becomes more pronounced as the labeling increases above a threshold value that depends on the cell cycle stage of the measured cell. Based on the modeling results, we present formulae for estimating assimilation rates in cells and discuss their underlying assumptions, conditions of applicability, and implications for the interpretation of intercellular variability in assimilation rates derived from nanoSIMS data, including the impacts of storage inclusion metabolism. We offer the formulae as a Matlab script to facilitate rapid data evaluation by nanoSIMS users.

Indexed as

assimilation ratescell growth modelnanoSIMSstable isotope probingstorage inclusions

Identifiers

PMID34917040
PMCPMC8670600
OpenAlexW3215465365

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.