ArticleJournal of applied genetics2023
Comparative genomic analysis of Stenotrophomonas maltophilia unravels their genetic variations and versatility trait.
Article in Journal of applied genetics, 2023. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Phenotypic and genomic insights into Stenotrophomonas sepilia SMBL8: metabolic versatility, antibiotic resistance and pathogenic potential.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2026Article
- Genomic characterization of clinical Stenotrophomonas strains from Thailand reveals five putative novel genospecies and extensive functional diversity.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Comparative Analyses Suggest Genome Stability and Plasticity inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Revised taxonomic classification of theFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- A comprehensive comparative genomic analysis revealed that plant growth promoting traits are ubiquitous in strains ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Comparative genomics of clinicalMicrobiology (Reading, England) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stenotrophomonas maltophilia is a species with immensely broad phenotypic and genotypic diversity that could widely distribute in natural and clinical environments. However, little attention has been paid to reveal their genome plasticity to diverse environments. In the present study, a comparative genomic analysis of S. maltophilia isolated from clinical and natural sources was systematically explored its genetic diversity of 42 sequenced genomes. The results showed that S. maltophilia owned an open pan-genome and had strong adaptability to different environments. A total of 1612 core genes were existed with an average of 39.43% of each genome, and the shared core genes might be necessary to maintain the basic characteristics of those S. maltophilia strains. Based on the results of the phylogenetic tree, the ANI value, and the distribution of accessory genes, genes associated with the fundamental process of those strains from the same habitat were found to be mostly conserved in evolution. Isolates from the same habitat had a high degree of similarity in COG category, and the most significant KEGG pathways were mainly involved in carbohydrate and amino acid metabolism, indicating that genes related to essential processes were mostly conserved in evolution for the clinical and environmental settings. Meanwhile, the number of resistance and efflux pump gene was significantly higher in the clinical setting than that of in the environmental setting. Collectively, this study highlights the evolutionary relationships of S. maltophilia isolated from clinical and environmental sources, shedding new light on its genomic diversity.
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.