Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 351

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

How to become a uropathogen: Comparative genomic analysis of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli strains

Open access
Brzuszkiewicz, Elzbieta, Brüggemann, Holger, Liesegang, Heiko, Emmerth, Melanie, Ölschläger, Tobias, Nagy, Gábor, Albermann, Kaj, Wagner, Christian, Buchrieser, Carmen, Emődy, Levente, Gottschalk, Gerhard, Hacker, Jörg, Dobrindt, Ulrich·2006·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Uropathogenic Escherichia coli (UPEC) strain 536 (O6:K15:H31) is one of the model organisms of extraintestinal pathogenic E. coli (ExPEC). To analyze this strain's genetic basis of urovirulence, we sequenced the entire genome and compared the data with the genome sequence of UPEC strain CFT073 (O6:K2:H1) and to the available genomes of nonpathogenic E. coli strain MG1655 (K-12) and enterohemorrhagic E. coli . The genome of strain 536 is ≈292 kb smaller than that of strain CFT073. Genomic differences between both UPEC are mainly restricted to large pathogenicity islands, parts of which are unique to strain 536 or CFT073. Genome comparison underlines that repeated insertions and deletions in certain parts of the genome contribute to genome evolution. Furthermore, 427 and 432 genes are only present in strain 536 or in both UPEC, respectively. The majority of the latter genes is encoded within smaller horizontally acquired DNA regions scattered all over the genome. Several of these genes are involved in increasing the pathogens' fitness and adaptability. Analysis of virulence-associated traits expressed in the two UPEC O6 strains, together with genome comparison, demonstrate the marked genetic and phenotypic variability among UPEC. The ability to accumulate and express a variety of virulence-associated genes distinguishes ExPEC from many commensals and forms the basis for the individual virulence potential of ExPEC. Accordingly, instead of a common virulence mechanism, different ways exist among ExPEC to cause disease.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0603038103

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 351

Metadata

Authors
Brzuszkiewicz, E., Brüggemann, H., Liesegang, H., Emmerth, M., Ölschläger, T., Nagy, G., Albermann, K., Wagner, C., Buchrieser, C., Emődy, L., Gottschalk, G., Hacker, J., & Dobrindt, U.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2006-08-22
Volume
103
Issue
34
Pages
12879-12884
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2141292721
Cited by
351
References
1
FWCI
17.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: How to become a uropathogen: Comparative genomic analysis of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli strains. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0603038103
The paper
Brzuszkiewicz, E., Brüggemann, H., Liesegang, H., Emmerth, M., Ölschläger, T., Nagy, G., Albermann, K., Wagner, C., Buchrieser, C., Emődy, L., Gottschalk, G., Hacker, J., & Dobrindt, U. (2006). How to become a uropathogen: Comparative genomic analysis of extraintestinal pathogenic Escherichia coli strains. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0603038103

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.