Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40904102›Full record

ArticlePhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2025

Phage provoke growth delays and SOS response induction despite CRISPR-Cas protection.

Benoit J Pons, Urszula Łapińska, Iolanda Lopes-Domingues, Matthew A W Chisnall, Edze R Westra, Stefano Pagliara, Stineke van Houte

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 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. Review
  2. Phage provoke growth delays and SOS response induction despite CRISPR-Cas protection.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Article
  3. Preface: the ecology and evolution of bacterial immune systems.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 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

7 authors.

Benoit J PonsUniversity of Exeter Environment and Sustainability Institute, Penryn TR10 9FE, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9137-1047
Urszula ŁapińskaBiosciences, University of Exeter Living Systems Institute, Exeter EX4 4QD, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3593-9248
Iolanda Lopes-DominguesUniversity of Exeter Environment and Sustainability Institute, Penryn TR10 9FE, UK.
Matthew A W ChisnallUniversity of Exeter Environment and Sustainability Institute, Penryn TR10 9FE, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7890-6801
Edze R WestraUniversity of Exeter Environment and Sustainability Institute, Penryn TR10 9FE, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4396-0354
Stefano PagliaraBiosciences, University of Exeter Living Systems Institute, Exeter EX4 4QD, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9796-1956
Stineke van HouteUniversity of Exeter Environment and Sustainability Institute, Penryn TR10 9FE, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7047-1308

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilLeverhulme TrustMedical Research CouncilUK Government's Horizon Europe funding guarantee
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bacteria evolve resistance against their phage foes with a wide range of resistance strategies whose costs and benefits depend on the level of protection they confer and on the costs for maintainance.

Indexed as

BacteriophagesCRISPR-Cas SystemsPseudomonas aeruginosaPseudomonas PhagesSOS Response, Geneticsbacterial defence systemsCRISPR-Cas systemmicrobial ecologymicrofluidicsphage–bacteria relationshipssingle-cell microscopy

Identifiers

PMID40904102
PMCPMC12409350

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.