Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36061127›Full record

ArticleAvicenna journal of medical biotechnology

Genome Analysis of an Enterococcal Prophage, Entfac.MY.

Maryam Yazdanizad, Ramin Mazaheri Nezhad Fard, Golshid Javdani Shahedin, Mohammadreza Salehi, Mahsa Dumanloo, Ali Akbar Saboor Yaraghi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Avicenna journal of medical biotechnology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

6 authors.

Maryam YazdanizadDepartment of Medical Biotechnology, Faculty of Advanced Science and Technology, Tehran Medical Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
Ramin Mazaheri Nezhad FardDepartment of Pathobiology, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Golshid Javdani ShahedinPasteur Institute of Iran, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammadreza SalehiDepartment of Infectious Diseases, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mahsa DumanlooDepartment of Clinical Pathobiology, Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Ali Akbar Saboor YaraghiDepartment of Pathobiology, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Bacteriophages are bacterial parasites. Unlike lytic bacteriophages, lysogenic bacteriophages do not multiply immediately after entering the host cells and may integrate their genomes into the bacterial genomes as prophages. Prophages can include various phenotypic and genotypic effects on the host bacteria. Methods: In this study, Results: Overall, 254 prophage genes were identified in the bacterial genome. The prophage included 39 housekeeping, 41 replication and regulation, 80 structural and packaging, and 48 lysis genes. Moreover, 46 genes with unknown functions were identified. All genes were annotated in DNA Data Bank of Japan. Conclusion: In general, most prophage genes were linked to packaging and structure (31.5%) gene group. However, genes with unknown functions included a high proportion (18.11%), which indicated necessity of further analyses. Genomic analysis of the prophages can be effective in better understanding of their roles in development of bacterial resistance to antibiotics. Moreover, identification and study of prophages can help researchers develop genetic engineering tools and novel infection therapies.

Indexed as

Enterococcus faeciumGenomic analysisProphage

Identifiers

PMID36061127
PMCPMC9376991

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.