The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparative genomics and functional analysis of niche-specific adaptation in Pseudomonas putida
Open accessAbstract
Pseudomonas putida is a gram-negative rod-shaped gammaproteobacterium that is found throughout various environments. Members of the species P. putida show a diverse spectrum of metabolic activities, which is indicative of their adaptation to various niches, which includes the ability to live in soils and sediments contaminated with high concentrations of heavy metals and organic contaminants. Pseudomonas putida strains are also found as plant growth-promoting rhizospheric and endophytic bacteria. The genome sequences of several P. putida species have become available and provide a unique tool to study the specific niche adaptation of the various P. putida strains. In this review, we compare the genomes of four P. putida strains: the rhizospheric strain KT2440, the endophytic strain W619, the aromatic hydrocarbon-degrading strain F1 and the manganese-oxidizing strain GB-1. Comparative genomics provided a powerful tool to gain new insights into the adaptation of P. putida to specific lifestyles and environmental niches, and clearly demonstrated that horizontal gene transfer played a key role in this adaptation process, as many of the niche-specific functions were found to be encoded on clearly defined genomic islands.
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
Ochsner, U. A., Johnson, Z., & Vasil, M. L. (2000) · Microbiology · doi:10.1099/00221287-146-1-185 · Cited by 310
Chaturvedi, V, Wong, B., & Newman, S. L. (1996) · The Journal of Immunology · doi:10.4049/jimmunol.156.10.3836 · Cited by 180 · cited 1×
“This process has been shown to be required for pathogenicity as it suppresses the reactive oxygen-mediated plant host defenses (Chaturvedi et al., 1996a, b; Velez et al., 2008).”
Background
Cited by
Hardoim, P. R., van Overbeek, L. S., Berg, G., Pirttilä, A. M., Compant, S., Campisano, A., Döring, M., & Sessitsch, A. (2015) · Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews · doi:10.1128/mmbr.00050-14 · Cited by 2,708
Multifaceted Interactions Between Endophytes and Plant: Developments and Prospects
Khare, E., Mishra, J., & Arora, N. K. (2018) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2018.02732 · Cited by 659
Qin, S., Xing, K., Jiang, J.-H., Xu, L.-H., & Li, W.-J. (2011) · Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology · doi:10.1007/s00253-010-2923-6 · Cited by 398
Biotechnological domestication of pseudomonads using synthetic biology
Nikel, P. I., Martínez-García, E., & de Lorenzo, V. (2014) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro3253 · Cited by 381
The revisited genome of Pseudomonas putida KT2440 enlightens its value as a robust metabolic chassis
Belda, E., van Heck, R. G. A., José Lopez‐Sanchez, M., Cruveiller, S., Barbe, V., Fraser, C., Klenk, H., Petersen, J., Morgat, A., Nikel, P. I., et al. (2016) · Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1111/1462-2920.13230 · Cited by 338
Metadata
- Authors
- Wu, X., Monchy, S., Taghavi, S., Zhu, W., Ramos, J., & van der Lelie, D.
- Venue
- FEMS Microbiology Reviews
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2011-03
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 299-323
- ISSN
- 0168-6445 (ISSN-L)
- 1574-6976
- OpenAlex
- W2167517017
- Cited by
- 315
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 7.68
- 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: Comparative genomics and functional analysis of niche-specific adaptation in Pseudomonas putida. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1574-6976.2010.00249.x
- The paper
- Wu, X., Monchy, S., Taghavi, S., Zhu, W., Ramos, J., & van der Lelie, D. (2011). Comparative genomics and functional analysis of niche-specific adaptation in Pseudomonas putida. FEMS Microbiology Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6976.2010.00249.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.
