Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9055426›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology1997

Identification of bacterial cells by chromosomal painting.

B D Lanoil, S J Giovannoni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 1997. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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.

B D LanoilMolecular and Cellular Biology Program, Oregon State University, Corvallis 97331, USA.
S J Giovannoni

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chromosomal painting is a technique for the microscopic localization of genetic material. It has been applied at the subcellular level to identify regions of eukaryotic chromosomes. Here we describe the development of bacterial chromosomal painting (BCP), a related technology for the identification of bacterial cells. Purified genomic DNAs from six bacterial strains were labeled by nick translation with the fluorochrome Fluor-X, Cy3, or Cy5. The average size of the labeled fragments was ca. 50 to 200 bp. The probes were hybridized to formaldehyde-fixed microbial cells attached to slides and visualized by fluorescence microscopy. In reciprocal comparisons, distantly related members of the class Proteobacteria (Escherichia coli and Oceanospirillum linum), different species of the genus Bacillus (B. subtilis and B. megaterium), and different serotypes of the subspecies Salmonella choleraesuis subsp. choleraesuis (serotype typhimurium LT2 and serotype typhi Ty2) could easily be distinguished. A combination of two probes, each labeled with a different fluorochrome, was used successfully to simultaneously identify two cell types in a mixture. Lysozyme treatment was required for the identification of Bacillus spp., and RNase digestion and pepsin digestion were found to enhance signal strength and specificity for all cell types tested. Chromosome in situ suppression, a technique that removes cross-hybridizing fragments from the probe, was necessary for the differentiation of the Salmonella serotypes but was not required to distinguish the more distantly related taxa. BCP may have applications in diverse branches of microbiology where the objective is the identification of bacterial cells.

Indexed as

Chromosomes, BacterialDNA ProbesBacteriaCell WallFluorescenceRNA, RibosomalDNA ProbesRNA, Ribosomal

Identifiers

PMID9055426
PMCPMC168401

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.