Cited by 90Bacterial Genetics and BiotechnologyGenomics and Chromatin DynamicsChromosomal and Genetic Variations

Detection and possible role of two large nondivisible zones on the Escherichia coli chromosome.

Open access
Rebollo, J E, François, V, Louarn, J M·1988·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Inversion of many predetermined segments of the Escherichia coli chromosome was attempted by using a system for in vivo selection of genomic rearrangements. Two types of constraints on these inversions were observed: (i) a sensitivity to rich medium when the distance between oriC and the 86- to 91-min region (which carries loci essential for transcription and translation) is increased; (ii) a poor viability or inviability of inversions having at least one endpoint in the one-third of the chromosome around replication terminators (with an exception for some inversions ending between these terminators). Although the first constraint is simply explained by a decreased dosage of the region involved, the second one may result from disruption of two long-range chromosomal organizations. The nondivisible zones thus disclosed coincide remarkably well with the two zones that we have previously described, which are polarized with respect to their replication. It is proposed that the two phenomena result from a sequence-dependent and polarized organization of the terminal region of the chromosome, which defines chromosome replication arms and may participate in nucleoid organization.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.85.24.9391

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Previous explanations for possible mechanisms underlying chromosomal inversion included illegitimate recombination, intra-chromosomally homologous recombination, and integrase-mediated site-specific recombination.

    “Based on these molecular evidences, previous explanations for the possible mechanisms underlying chromosomal inversion included illegitimate recombination,51–53 intra-chromosomally homologous recombination,54 as well as integrase-mediated site-specific recombination.55 , 56”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rebollo, J. E., François, V, & Louarn, J. M.
Affiliations
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
1988-12
Volume
85
Issue
24
Pages
9391-9395
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2041856639
Cited by
90
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 6
FWCI
2.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Bacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Chromatin Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Chromosomal and Genetic Variations
Keywords
Escherichia coli chromosome, chromosomal inversions, chromosome replication, nucleoid organization, dosage sensitivity, chromosome organization
MeSH terms
Chromosome Mapping, Chromosomes, Escherichia coli, Chromosome Inversion, Phenotype

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