ArticlePloS one2023
Phylogenetic trees of closely related bacterial species and subspecies based on frequencies of short nucleotide sequences.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comprehensive Phylogenomic Analyses Support the Reclassification of Multiple Bacteroides Species.Current microbiology · 2025Article
- Molecular detection, seroprevalence, and phylogenetic analysis ofVeterinary world · 2025Article
- Comparative genome analysis of human pathogenMicrobial genomics · 2025Article
- DNA metabarcoding and its potential in microbial risk assessment in waste sorting plants.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Poplar: a phylogenomics pipeline.Bioinformatics advances · 2025Article
- Sequencing-based analysis of microbiomes.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2024Review
- Article
- Mechanisms of low susceptibility to the disinfectant benzalkonium chloride in a multidrug-resistant environmental isolate ofFrontiers in microbiology · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bacterial phylogenetic analyses are commonly performed to explore the evolutionary relationships among various bacterial species and genera based on their 16S rRNA gene sequences; however, these results are limited by mosaicism, intragenomic heterogeneity, and difficulties in distinguishing between related species. In this study, we aimed to perform genome-wide comparisons of different bacterial species, namely Escherichia coli, Shigella, Yersinia, Klebsiella, and Neisseria spp., based on their K-mer profiles to construct phylogenetic trees. Pentanucleotide frequency analyses (512 patterns of 5 nucleotides each) were performed to distinguish between highly similar species. Moreover, Escherichia albertii strains were clearly distinguished from E. coli and Shigella, despite being closely related to enterohemorrhagic E. coli in the phylogenetic tree. In addition, our phylogenetic tree of Ipomoea species based on pentamer frequency in chloroplast genomes was correlated with previously reported morphological similarities. Furthermore, a support vector machine clearly classified E. coli and Shigella genomes based on their pentanucleotide profiles. These results suggest that phylogenetic analyses based on penta- or hexamer profiles are a useful methodology for microbial phylogenetic studies. In addition, we introduced an R application, Phy5, which generates a phylogenetic tree based on genome-wide comparisons of pentamer profiles. The online version of Phy5 can be accessed at https://phy5.shinyapps.io/Phy5R/ and its command line version Phy5cli can be downloaded at https://github.com/YoshioNakano2021/phy5.
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.