The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Prophages and bacterial genomics: what have we learned so far?
Open accessAbstract
Epigraph: There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact. Mark Twain 1883 Life on the Mississippi Summary Bacterial genome nucleotide sequences are being completed at a rapid and increasing rate. Integrated virus genomes (prophages) are common in such genomes. Fifty‐one of the 82 such genomes published to date carry prophages, and these contain 230 recognizable putative prophages. Prophages can constitute as much as 10–20% of a bacterium's genome and are major contributors to differences between individuals within species. Many of these prophages appear to be defective and are in a state of mutational decay. Prophages, including defective ones, can contribute important biological properties to their bacterial hosts. Therefore, if we are to comprehend bacterial genomes fully, it is essential that we are able to recognize accurately and understand their prophages from nucleotide sequence analysis. Analysis of the evolution of prophages can shed light on the evolution of both bacteriophages and their hosts. Comparison of the Rac prophages in the sequenced genomes of three Escherichia coli strains and the Pnm prophages in two Neisseria meningitidis strains suggests that some prophages can lie in residence for very long times, perhaps millions of years, and that recombination events have occurred between related prophages that reside at different locations in a bacterium's genome. In addition, many genes in defective prophages remain functional, so a significant portion of the temperate bacteriophage gene pool resides in prophages.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs
Altschul, S. (1997) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/25.17.3389 · Cited by 73,302
The complete genome sequence of the gram-positive bacterium Bacillus subtilis.
Kunst, F., Ogasawara, N., Moszer, I., Albertini, A. M., Alloni, G., Azevedo, V., Bertero, M. G., Bessières, P., Bolotin, A., Borchert, S., et al. (1997) · Nature · doi:10.1038/36786 · Cited by 3,679
The Complete Genome Sequence of the Lactic Acid Bacterium Lactococcus lactis ssp. lactis IL1403
Bolotin, A., Wincker, P., Mauger, S., Jaillon, O., Malarme, K., Weissenbach, J., Ehrlich, S. D., & Sorokin, A. (2001) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.gr-1697r · Cited by 1,139
Cited by
Lysogeny in nature: mechanisms, impact and ecology of temperate phages
Howard-Varona, C., Hargreaves, K. R., Abedon, S. T., & Sullivan, M. B. (2017) · The ISME Journal · doi:10.1038/ismej.2017.16 · Cited by 894
Edwards, R. A., & Rohwer, F. (2005) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro1163 · Cited by 820
Explosive cell lysis as a mechanism for the biogenesis of bacterial membrane vesicles and biofilms
Turnbull, L., Toyofuku, M., Hynen, A. L., Kurosawa, M., Pessi, G., Petty, N. K., Osvath, S. R., Cárcamo-Oyarce, G., Gloag, E. S., Shimoni, R., et al. (2016) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms11220 · Cited by 709
Viral dark matter and virus–host interactions resolved from publicly available microbial genomes
Roux, S., Hallam, S. J., Woyke, T., & Sullivan, M. B. (2015) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.08490 · Cited by 478
Genomics of the group of organisms
RASKO, D., ALTHERR, M., HAN, C., & RAVEL, J. (2005) · FEMS Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.femsre.2004.12.005 · Cited by 470
Metadata
- Authors
- Casjens, S.
- Venue
- Molecular Microbiology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-06-17
- Volume
- 49
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 277-300
- ISSN
- 0950-382X (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2958
- OpenAlex
- W1921607560
- Cited by
- 896
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 31.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Prophages and bacterial genomics: what have we learned so far? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1365-2958.2003.03580.x
- The paper
- Casjens, S. (2003). Prophages and bacterial genomics: what have we learned so far? Molecular Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2958.2003.03580.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.