The DOI matches its Crossref record; 50 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Defining the genetic differences between wild and domestic strains of Bacillus subtilis that affect poly‐γ‐dl‐glutamic acid production and biofilm formation
Abstract
Summary: Biofilms are communities of microbial cells that are encased in a self‐produced, polymeric matrix and are adherent to a surface. For several species of bacteria, an enhanced ability to form biofilms has been linked with an increased capability to produce exopolymers. To identify exopolymers of Bacillus subtilis that can contribute to biofilm formation, we transferred the genetic determinants that control exopolymer production from a wild, exopolymer‐positive strain to a domesticated, exopolymer‐negative strain. Mapping these genetic determinants led to the identification of γ‐poly‐dl‐glutamic acid (γ‐PGA) as an exopolymer that increases biofilm formation, possibly through enhancing cell–surface interactions. Production of γ‐PGA by Bacillus subtilis was known to be dependent on the two‐component regulator ComPA; this study highlighted the additional dependence on the DegS‐DegU, DegQ and SwrA regulator proteins. The inability of the domestic strain of B. subtilis to produce γ‐PGA was mapped to two base pairs; a single base pair change in the promoter region of degQ and a single base pair insertion in the coding region of swrA. Introduction of alleles of degQ and swrA from the wild strain into the domestic strain was sufficient to allow γ‐PGA production. In addition to controlling γ‐PGA production, ComPA and DegSU were also shown to activate biofilm formation through an as yet undefined pathway. The identification of these regulators as affecting γ‐PGA production and biofilm formation suggests that these processes are regulated by osmolarity, high cell density and phase variation.
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
Costerton, J. W., Lewandowski, Z., Caldwell, D. E., Korber, D. R., & Lappin-Scott, H. M. (1995) · Annual Review of Microbiology · doi:10.1146/annurev.mi.49.100195.003431 · Cited by 4,544
Mechanisms of biofilm resistance to antimicrobial agents
Mah, T.-F. C., & O'Toole, G. A. (2001) · Trends in Microbiology · doi:10.1016/s0966-842x(00)01913-2 · Cited by 3,921
Extracellular DNA Required for Bacterial Biofilm Formation
Whitchurch, C. B., Tolker-Nielsen, T., Ragas, P. C., & Mattick, J. S. (2002) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.295.5559.1487 · Cited by 2,203
Biofilms: the matrix revisited
Branda, S. S., Vik, Å., Friedman, L., & Kolter, R. (2005) · Trends in Microbiology · doi:10.1016/j.tim.2004.11.006 · Cited by 1,791
Smith, M. C. M. (1991) · FEBS Letters · doi:10.1016/0014-5793(91)80059-c · Cited by 1,519
Molecular biological methods for Bacillus
Harwood, C. R., & Cutting, S. M. (1990) · Cited by 1,430
Fruiting body formation by Bacillus subtilis
Branda, S. S., González-Pastor, J. E., Ben-Yehuda, S., Losick, R., & Kolter, R. (2001) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.191384198 · Cited by 1,129
Bais, H. P., Fall, R., & Vivanco, J. M. (2004) · Plant Physiology · doi:10.1104/pp.103.028712 · Cited by 1,034
Biofilm formation by Pseudomonas aeruginosa wild type, flagella and type IV pili mutants
Klausen, M., Heydorn, A., Ragas, P., Lambertsen, L., Aaes‐Jørgensen, A., Molin, S., & Tolker‐Nielsen, T. (2003) · Molecular Microbiology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2958.2003.03525.x · Cited by 1,020
Genes involved in matrix formation in Pseudomonas aeruginosa PA14 biofilms
Friedman, L., & Kolter, R. (2004) · Molecular Microbiology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2958.2003.03877.x · Cited by 741
Cited by
Microbial Fermentation and Its Role in Quality Improvement of Fermented Foods
Sharma, R., Garg, P., Kumar, P., Bhatia, S. K., & Kulshrestha, S. (2020) · Fermentation · doi:10.3390/fermentation6040106 · Cited by 824
Ecology and genomics of Bacillus subtilis
Earl, A. M., Losick, R., & Kolter, R. (2008) · Trends in Microbiology · doi:10.1016/j.tim.2008.03.004 · Cited by 560
Microbial synthesis of poly-γ-glutamic acid: current progress, challenges, and future perspectives
Luo, Z., Guo, Y., Liu, J., Qiu, H., Zhao, M., Zou, W., & Li, S. (2016) · Biotechnology for Biofuels · doi:10.1186/s13068-016-0537-7 · Cited by 274
Beneficial biofilm formation by industrial bacteria Bacillus subtilis and related species
Morikawa, M. (2006) · Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering · doi:10.1263/jbb.101.1 · Cited by 265
A mechanical signal transmitted by the flagellum controls signalling in Bacillus subtilis
Cairns, L. S., Marlow, V. L., Bissett, E., Ostrowski, A., & Stanley‐Wall, N. R. (2013) · Molecular Microbiology · doi:10.1111/mmi.12342 · Cited by 143
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Stanley, N. R., & Lazazzera, B. A.
- Venue
- Molecular Microbiology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2005-07-05
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 1143-1158
- ISSN
- 0950-382X (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2958
- OpenAlex
- W2130666019
- Cited by
- 264
- References
- 50
- FWCI
- 3.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Defining the genetic differences between wild and domestic strains of Bacillus subtilis that affect poly‐γ‐dl‐glutamic acid production and biofilm formation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2958.2005.04746.x
- The paper
- Stanley, N. R., & Lazazzera, B. A. (2005). Defining the genetic differences between wild and domestic strains of Bacillus subtilis that affect poly‐γ‐dl‐glutamic acid production and biofilm formation. Molecular Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2958.2005.04746.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.