Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37943288›Full record

ReviewMicrobiology (Reading, England)2023

Mutation bias and adaptation in bacteria.

James S Horton, Tiffany B Taylor

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Microbiology (Reading, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Exploring clonality ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2026
    Article
  5. High stability of the genome ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Antimicrobial Resistant Factors inInternational journal of genomics · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Survival Strategies ofAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    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

2 authors.

James S HortonMilner Centre for Evolution, Department of Life Sciences, University of Bath, BA2 7AY, UK.
Tiffany B TaylorMilner Centre for Evolution, Department of Life Sciences, University of Bath, BA2 7AY, UK.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/T012994/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genetic mutation, which provides the raw material for evolutionary adaptation, is largely a stochastic force. However, there is ample evidence showing that mutations can also exhibit strong biases, with some mutation types and certain genomic positions mutating more often than others. It is becoming increasingly clear that mutational bias can play a role in determining adaptive outcomes in bacteria in both the laboratory and the clinic. As such, understanding the causes and consequences of mutation bias can help microbiologists to anticipate and predict adaptive outcomes. In this review, we provide an overview of the mechanisms and features of the bacterial genome that cause mutational biases to occur. We then describe the environmental triggers that drive these mechanisms to be more potent and outline the adaptive scenarios where mutation bias can synergize with natural selection to define evolutionary outcomes. We conclude by describing how understanding mutagenic genomic features can help microbiologists predict areas sensitive to mutational bias, and finish by outlining future work that will help us achieve more accurate evolutionary forecasts.

Indexed as

BacteriaBiological EvolutionBiasMutagenesisMutationadaptationbacterial evolutionevolutionary forecastingmutation biasmutation hotspotstress response

Identifiers

PMID37943288
PMCPMC10710837

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.