Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39929895›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Antiviral defence arsenal across members of the Bacillus cereus group.

Elise July, Annika Gillis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Isolation ofmicroPublication biology · 2025
    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.

Elise JulyLaboratory of Food and Environmental Microbiology, Earth and Life Institute, Université Catholique de Louvain, Croix du Sud 2, Box L7.05.12, 1348, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0001-8726-7821
Annika GillisLaboratory of Food and Environmental Microbiology, Earth and Life Institute, Université Catholique de Louvain, Croix du Sud 2, Box L7.05.12, 1348, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium. annika.gillis@uclouvain.be.ORCID 0000-0002-6735-3359

Funding

Université Catholique de Louvain FSR Seedfund 2022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacteria co-evolve with bacteriophages to overcome each other's defence arsenal. Bacillus cereus group gathers bacteria of medical and agricultural importance, including foodborne pathogens. So far, few studies have portrayed a complete defence arsenal of microorganisms, and the role of antiviral systems in the Bacillus cereus group has been overlooked. Here, we investigate the repertoire of defence systems in 6354 B. cereus group's genomic assemblies, using bioinformatics tools DefenseFinder and PADLOC. Our analyses provide an overview of the diversity and abundance of defence systems in this group, with 83,738 systems distributed by 2 to 33 within each assembly. Comparing PADLOC and DefenseFinder predictions showed that the most prevalent strategy is Restriction-Modification, but many abortive infection systems also intervene in the group's defence, such as Septu, Gabija and Lamassu. Most defences were encoded on both plasmids and the chromosome, though some tend to have a preferential genomic location. We also studied the defence systems associations within the genomic assemblies. Overall, our results establish a baseline picturing the rich and complex antiviral arsenal encoded by B. cereus group's species and provide clues for studying co-existing strategies displayed by these bacteria to subvert phages and other MGEs invasions.

Indexed as

Bacillus cereusBacteriophagesComputational BiologyGenome, BacterialBacillus cereus groupBacteriophagesDefence systemsDefence systems associationGenomic locationPhage defence systems

Identifiers

PMID39929895
PMCPMC11811056

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.