ArticleBMC genomics2025
Prediction of lipase-specific foldase-dependence in bacterial lipase subfamilies I.1 and I.2.
Article in BMC genomics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Screening of Marine Bacteria for Lipase Activity and Application as Whole-Cell Biocatalysts.Microorganisms · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMost bacterial lipases in subfamily I.1/I.2 depend on a specific chaperone protein, lipase-specific foldase (Lif), for folding into their active form. In contrast, several Lif-independent lipases have been reported in subfamily I.1. Lif-independent lipases have the potential to be industrially useful owing to their ease of heterologous expression; however, no method has been reported to predict Lif-dependence for an arbitrary lipase. In this study, we comprehensively estimated the Lif-dependence of subfamily I.1/I.2.
resultsTo estimate Lif-dependence, we comprehensively analyzed the presence or absence of Lif genes in the genomes of bacteria from which the lipases were derived and integrated the results with those of phylogenetic analysis. We identified a range of lipases from the Pseudomonas fragi/Proteus vulgaris clade, which contained all known Lif-independent lipases and were enriched for lipases that did not coexist with Lif. Sequences and structural features conserved in the P. fragi/P. vulgaris clade and other lipases were identified, and the residues involved in Lif-dependence were inferred. Furthermore, we identified the Pseudoalteromonas shioyasakiensis clade, which is phylogenetically distinct from the P. fragi/P. vulgaris clade, as having no Lif in the genome of the bacterium from which the lipase was derived. The P. shioyasakiensis clade lipase, PliLip, was heterologously expressed in Escherichia coli in an active form, independent of Lif.
conclusionsIn this study, we developed a method to predict Lif-dependence in any lipase belonging to subfamily I.1/I.2 and comprehensively extracted putative Lif-independent lipases from public databases. This study contributes to expand the diversity of industrially available Lif-independent lipases and provides fundamental insights into the evolution of lipases and Lif.
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.