ArticlePloS one2023
Comparative genomics of the proteostasis network in extreme acidophiles.
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 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Adaptive response of the holdase chaperone network of Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans ATCC 23270 to stresses and energy sources.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2025Article
- Surfing in the storm: how Paraburkholderia xenovorans thrives under stress during biodegradation of toxic aromatic compounds and other stressors.FEMS microbiology reviews · 2025Review
- Comparative whole genome analysis of face-derived Streptococcus infantis CX-4 unravels the functions related to skin barrier.Genes & genomics · 2024Article
- Article
- Osmotic response inFrontiers in microbiology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Extreme acidophiles thrive in harsh environments characterized by acidic pH, high concentrations of dissolved metals and high osmolarity. Most of these microorganisms are chemolithoautotrophs that obtain energy from low redox potential sources, such as the oxidation of ferrous ions. Under these conditions, the mechanisms that maintain homeostasis of proteins (proteostasis), as the main organic components of the cells, are of utmost importance. Thus, the analysis of protein chaperones is critical for understanding how these organisms deal with proteostasis under such environmental conditions. In this work, using a bioinformatics approach, we performed a comparative genomic analysis of the genes encoding classical, periplasmic and stress chaperones, and the protease systems. The analysis included 35 genomes from iron- or sulfur-oxidizing autotrophic, heterotrophic, and mixotrophic acidophilic bacteria. The results showed that classical ATP-dependent chaperones, mostly folding chaperones, are widely distributed, although they are sub-represented in some groups. Acidophilic bacteria showed redundancy of genes coding for the ATP-independent holdase chaperones RidA and Hsp20. In addition, a systematically high redundancy of genes encoding periplasmic chaperones like HtrA and YidC was also detected. In the same way, the proteolytic ATPase complexes ClpPX and Lon presented redundancy and broad distribution. The presence of genes that encoded protein variants was noticeable. In addition, genes for chaperones and protease systems were clustered within the genomes, suggesting common regulation of these activities. Finally, some genes were differentially distributed between bacteria as a function of the autotrophic or heterotrophic character of their metabolism. These results suggest that acidophiles possess an abundant and flexible proteostasis network that protects proteins in organisms living in energy-limiting and extreme environmental conditions. Therefore, our results provide a means for understanding the diversity and significance of proteostasis mechanisms in extreme acidophilic bacteria.
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.