ArticleScientific reports2025
Genomic and metabolic network properties in thermophiles and psychrophiles compared to mesophiles.
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 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Giant viruses of the polar regions: diversity, endemism, adaptation and ecological structuring.FEMS microbiology ecology · 2026Review
- Decoding the cold: integrated secretome profiling reveals extracellular adaptation mechanisms in Glaciozyma antarctica.Extremophiles : life under extreme conditions · 2026Article
- Molecular adaptations and engineering of extremophiles for synthetic biology and biotechnological applications.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Review
- Extremophile-Derived Bioactives in Cosmeceuticals: Bridging Nutraceuticals and Skincare for Holistic Wellness.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Thermophiles and psychrophiles, adapted to extreme temperatures, thrive in hot and cold environments, respectively. Despite their importance to biotechnology and environmental research, their adaptation mechanisms remain unclear. We have performed a comparative analysis of the genomes and metabolic networks of these species. Psychrophiles were found to have larger genomes, more genes, bigger metabolic networks, fewer metabolite exchanges, and higher growth rates compared to thermophiles. These species show amino acid and codon preferences: thermophiles favor GC-rich codons, while psychrophiles prefer AT-rich ones. This aligns with their genomic G + C content, which is higher in thermophiles and linked to their growth. Compared to mesophiles, species which are living in normal conditions, extremophiles show significantly reduced metabolite exchange, with psychrophiles importing fewer nutrients and thermophiles exporting fewer metabolites. Both groups exhibit distinct active metabolic reactions enriched with unique and important processes. In summary, both thermophiles and psychrophiles exhibit unique genomic profiles and metabolic network properties that likely support their adaptation to extreme temperatures.
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.