The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quorum sensing and policing of Pseudomonas aeruginosa social cheaters
Open accessAbstract
Significance: Cooperation is subject to social cheating. Cheats benefit from the activity of cooperators and gain a fitness advantage. One way higher organisms prevent infiltration by cheats is policing: Cooperators penalize cheats at some cost to themselves. Cooperating groups of bacteria are susceptible to social cheating, but little is known about bacterial policing. We have built on an understanding a quorum-sensing regulated cooperative activity in Pseudomonas aeruginosa to show that quorum sensing control of and resistance to cyanide production serves as a cheater policing mechanism. Understanding how bacteria cooperate and how they control social cheats has evolutionary implications, provides important insights about ways to control bacterial populations, and has ramifications with respect to synthetic system design.
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
Cooperation and competition in pathogenic bacteria
Griffin, A. S., West, S. A., & Buckling, A. (2004) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02744 · Cited by 1,104
Relatedness and the fraternal major transitions
Queller, D. C. (2000) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2000.0727 · Cited by 301
Cited by
Bacterial quorum sensing in complex and dynamically changing environments
Mukherjee, S., & Bassler, B. L. (2019) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/s41579-019-0186-5 · Cited by 1,374
Progress in and promise of bacterial quorum sensing research
Whiteley, M., Diggle, S. P., & Greenberg, E. P. (2017) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature24624 · Cited by 1,285
Self-citationBacterial Quorum Sensing and Microbial Community Interactions
Abisado, R. G., Benomar, S., Klaus, J. R., Dandekar, A. A., & Chandler, J. R. (2018) · mBio · doi:10.1128/mbio.02331-17 · Cited by 674
Self-citationThe biogeography of polymicrobial infection
Stacy, A., McNally, L., Darch, S. E., Brown, S. P., & Whiteley, M. (2016) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro.2015.8 · Cited by 294
Control of bacterial metabolism by quorum sensing
Goo, E., An, J. H., Kang, Y., & Hwang, I. (2015) · Trends in Microbiology · doi:10.1016/j.tim.2015.05.007 · Cited by 155
Metadata
- Authors
- Wang, M., Schaefer, A. L., Dandekar, A. A., & Greenberg, E. P.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2015-02-02
- Volume
- 112
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 2187-2191
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W1977809773
- Cited by
- 218
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 9.13
- 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: Quorum sensing and policing of Pseudomonas aeruginosa social cheaters. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.1500704112
- The paper
- Wang, M., Schaefer, A. L., Dandekar, A. A., & Greenberg, E. P. (2015). Quorum sensing and policing of Pseudomonas aeruginosa social cheaters. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1500704112
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.
