Cited by 68Bacterial Genetics and BiotechnologyProbiotics and Fermented FoodsBacteriophages and microbial interactions

Autolysis of Lactococcus lactis Is Influenced by Proteolysis

Open access
Buist, Girbe, Venema, Gerard, Kok, Jan·1998·Journal of Bacteriology

Abstract

The autolysin AcmA of Lactococcus lactis was shown to be degraded by the extracellular lactococcal proteinase PrtP. Autolysis, as evidenced by reduction in optical density of a stationary-phase culture and concomitant release of intracellular proteins, was greatly reduced when L. lactis MG1363 cells expressed the cell wall-anchored lactococcal proteinase PrtP of the PI-type caseinolytic specificity (PI). On the other hand, lactococcal strains that did not produce the proteinase showed a high level of autolysis, which was also observed when the cells produced the secreted form of PI or a cell wall-anchored proteinase with PIII-type specificity. Autolysis was also increased when MG1363 expressed the cell wall-anchored hybrid PI/PIII-type proteinase PIac. Zymographic analysis of AcmA activity during stationary phase showed that AcmA was quickly degraded by PI and much more slowly by PrtP proteinases with PIII-type and intermediate specificities. Autolysis of L. lactis by AcmA was influenced by the specificity, amount, and location of the lactococcal proteinase. No autolysis was observed when the various proteinases were expressed in an L. lactis acmA deletion mutant, indicating that PrtP itself did not cause lysis of cells. The chain length of a strain was significantly shortened when the strain expressed a cell wall-anchored active proteinase.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/jb.180.22.5947-5953.1998

Cites

40 of 40 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Buist, G., Venema, G., & Kok, J.
Affiliations
University of Groningen (NL)
Venue
Journal of Bacteriology
Published
1998-11-15
Volume
180
Issue
22
Pages
5947-5953
ISSN
  • 0021-9193 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-5530
OpenAlex
W2144240368
Cited by
68
References
40
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 4
FWCI
2.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Bacteriology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Bacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Probiotics and Fermented Foods
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Bacteriophages and microbial interactions
Keywords
Lactococcus lactis, autolysis, proteolysis, stationary phase, intracellular protein release
MeSH terms
Bacteriolysis, Muramidase, Serine Endopeptidases, Lactococcus lactis

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