Cited by 16Bacteriophages and microbial interactionsBacterial Genetics and BiotechnologyCRISPR and Genetic Engineering

Phages carry orphan antitoxin-like enzymes to neutralize the DarTG1 toxin-antitoxin defense system

Open access
Johannesman, Anna, Awasthi, Leila C., Carlson, Nico, LeRoux, Michele·2025·Nature Communications

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

The astounding number of anti-phage defenses encoded by bacteria is countered by an elaborate set of phage counter-defenses, though their evolutionary origins are often unknown. Here, we discover an orphan antitoxin counter-defense element in T4-like phages that can overcome the bacterial toxin-antitoxin phage defense system, DarTG1. The DarT1 toxin, an ADP-ribosyltransferase, modifies phage DNA to prevent replication while its cognate antitoxin, DarG1, is an ADP-ribosylglycohydrolase that reverses these modifications in uninfected bacteria. The orphan phage DarG1-like protein, which we term anti-DarT factor NADAR (AdfN), removes ADP-ribose modifications from phage DNA during infection thereby enabling replication in DarTG1-containing bacteria. AdfN, like DarG1, is in the NADAR superfamily of ADP-ribosylglycohydrolases found across domains of life. We find divergent NADAR proteins in unrelated phages that likewise exhibit anti-DarTG1 activity, underscoring the importance of ADP-ribosylation in bacterial-phage interactions, and revealing the function of a substantial subset of the NADAR superfamily.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41467-025-56887-7

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Johannesman, A., Awasthi, L. C., Carlson, N., & LeRoux, M.
Affiliations
Washington University in St. Louis (US)
Corresponding author
LeRoux, Michele
Venue
Nature Communications
Published
2025-02-13
Volume
16
Issue
1
Pages
1598-1598
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4407426407
Cited by
16
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 5
FWCI
8.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Digital Commons@Becker (Washington University School of Medicine) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Division of Intramural Research, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (DP2 AI177955)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Bacteriophages and microbial interactions
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Bacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Keywords
toxin-antitoxin systems, ADP-ribosyltransferase, ADP-ribosylation, T4-like phages

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review