ArticleMicrobial cell factories2024
CO
Article in Microbial cell factories, 2024. 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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhanced secretion of thermostable phytases from Myceliophthora thermophila by Komagataella phaffii.Microbial cell factories · 2026Article
- Hydrogen-driven, ATP-dependent biocatalytic reduction of carboxylic acids under non-explosive conditions.Green chemistry : an international journal and green chemistry resource : GC · 2025Article
- UsingACS synthetic biology · 2025Article
- Rieske Oxygenase-Catalyzed Biotransformations in Recombinant Cupriavidus necator Fueled by Formate Oxidation.Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology · 2025Article
- Cultivation ofBiotechnology reports (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Article
- CnRed: Efficient, Marker-free Genome Engineering ofACS synthetic biology · 2025Article
- A promoter library for tuning gene expression inFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Unlocking the potential of Cupriavidus necator H16 as a platform for bioproducts production from carbon dioxide.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExisting plasmid systems offer a fundamental foundation for gene expression in Cupriavidus necator; however, their applicability is constrained by the limitations of conjugation. Low segregational stabilities and plasmid copy numbers, particularly in the absence of selection pressure, pose challenges. Phytases, recognized for their widespread application as supplements in animal feed to enhance phosphate availability, present an intriguing prospect for heterologous production in C. necator. The establishment of stable, high-copy number plasmid that can be electroporated would support the utilization of C. necator for the production of single-cell protein from CO
resultsIn this study, we introduce a novel class of expression plasmids specifically designed for electroporation. These plasmids contain partitioning systems to boost segregation stability, eliminating the need for selection pressure. As a proof of concept, we successfully produced Escherichia coli derived AppA phytase in C. necator H16 PHB
conclusionThe new expression system presented in this study offers a highly efficient platform for protein production and a wide array of synthetic biology applications. It incorporates robust promoters that exhibit either constitutive activity or can be selectively activated when cells transition from heterotrophic to autotrophic growth. This versatility makes it a powerful tool for tailored gene expression. Moreover, the potential to generate active phytases within C. necator H16 holds promising implications for the valorization of CO
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.