ArticleScientific reports2023
Comparative genomics and proteomics analysis of phages infecting multi-drug resistant Escherichia coli O177 isolated from cattle faeces.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Prevalence, Virulence, and Pathogenic Mechanisms of Mastitis-AssociatedVeterinary sciences · 2026Review
- Novel Escherichia coli phages representing a distinct genus within the subfamily Stephanstirmvirinae: genome and host range characteristics.Archives of virology · 2025Article
- Proteomic Analysis of Marine Bacteriophages: Structural Conservation, Post-Translational Modifications, and Phage-Host Interactions.Environmental microbiology · 2025Article
- Genomic analysis and characterization of lytic bacteriophages that target antimicrobial resistantHeliyon · 2024Article
- Isolation, Characterization, and Unlocking the Potential of Mimir124 Phage for Personalized Treatment of Difficult, Multidrug-Resistant UropathogenicInternational journal of molecular sciences · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The increasing prevalence of antimicrobial-resistant (AMR) pathogens has become a major global health concern. To address this challenge, innovative strategies such as bacteriophage therapy must be optimised. Genomic characterisation is a crucial step in identifying suitable phage candidates for combating AMR pathogens. The aim of this study was to characterise seven phages that infect the Escherichia coli O177 strain using a whole genome sequencing. The analysis of genome sequences revealed that these phages had linear dsDNA, with genome sizes spanning from 136, 483 to 166,791 bp and GC content varying from 35.39 to 43.63%. Taxonomically, the phages were classified under three different subfamilies (Stephanstirmvirinae, Tevenvirinae, and Vequintavirinae) and three genera (Phapecoctavirus, Tequatrovirus, and Vequintavirus) within the class Caudoviricetes. In silico PhageAI analysis predicted that all the phages were virulent, with confidence levels between 96.07 and 97.26%. The phage genomes contained between 66 and 82 ORFs, which encode hypothetical and putative functional proteins. In addition, the phage genomes contained core genes associated with molecular processes such as DNA replication, transcription modulation, nucleotide metabolism, phage structure (capsid and tail), and lysis. None of the genomes carried genes associated with undesirable traits such as integrase, antimicrobial resistance, virulence, and toxins. The study revealed high genome and proteome homology among E. coli O177 phages and other known Escherichia phages. The results suggest that the seven phages are new members of the genera Phapecoctavirus, Tequatrovirus, and Vequintavirus under the subfamilies Stephanstirmvirinae, Tevenvirinae, and Vequintavirinae, respectively.
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.