The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Staphylococcus aureus Develops an Alternative, ica- Independent Biofilm in the Absence of the arlRS Two-Component System
Open accessAbstract
The biofilm formation capacity of Staphylococcus aureus clinical isolates is considered an important virulence factor for the establishment of chronic infections. Environmental conditions affect the biofilm formation capacity of S. aureus , indicating the existence of positive and negative regulators of the process. The majority of the screening procedures for identifying genes involved in biofilm development have been focused on genes whose presence is essential for the process. In this report, we have used random transposon mutagenesis and systematic disruption of all S. aureus two-component systems to identify negative regulators of S. aureus biofilm development in a chemically defined medium ( H ussain- H astings- W hite m odified medium [HHWm]). The results of both approaches coincided in that they identified arlRS as a repressor of biofilm development under both steady-state and flow conditions. The arlRS mutant exhibited an increased initial attachment as well as increased accumulation of poly- N -acetylglucosamine (PNAG). However, the biofilm formation of the arlRS mutant was not affected when the icaADBC operon was deleted, indicating that PNAG is not an essential compound of the biofilm matrix produced in HHWm. Disruption of the major autolysin gene, atl , did not produce any effect on the biofilm phenotype of an arlRS mutant. Epistatic experiments with global regulators involved in staphylococcal-biofilm formation indicated that sarA deletion abolished, whereas agr deletion reinforced, the biofilm development promoted by the arlRS mutation.
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
Heilmann, C., Hussain, M., Peters, G., & Götz, F. (1997) · Molecular Microbiology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2958.1997.4101774.x · Cited by 700
Kaplan, J. B., Velliyagounder, K., Ragunath, C., Rohde, H., Mack, D., Knobloch, J. K.-M., & Ramasubbu, N. (2004) · Journal of Bacteriology · doi:10.1128/jb.186.24.8213-8220.2004 · Cited by 301
Cited by
Staphylococcus aureus biofilms: Properties, regulation, and roles in human disease
Archer, N. K., Mazaitis, M. J., Costerton, J. W., Leid, J. G., Powers, M. E., & Shirtliff, M. E. (2011) · Virulence · doi:10.4161/viru.2.5.17724 · Cited by 1,018
agr-Mediated Dispersal of Staphylococcus aureus Biofilms
Boles, B. R., & Horswill, A. R. (2008) · PLoS Pathogens · doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1000052 · Cited by 963
Izano, E. A., Amarante, M. A., Kher, W. B., & Kaplan, J. B. (2008) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.02073-07 · Cited by 553
Rohde, H., Burandt, E. C., Siemssen, N., Frommelt, L., Burdelski, C., Wurster, S., Scherpe, S., Davies, A. P., Harris, L. G., Horstkotte, M. A., et al. (2007) · Biomaterials · doi:10.1016/j.biomaterials.2006.11.046 · Cited by 489
Abdallah, M., Benoliel, C., Drider, D., Dhulster, P., & Chihib, N.-E. (2014) · Archives of Microbiology · doi:10.1007/s00203-014-0983-1 · Cited by 324
Metadata
- Authors
- Toledo-Arana, A., Merino, N., Vergara-Irigaray, M., Débarbouillé, M., Penadés, J. R., & Lasa, I.
- Venue
- Journal of Bacteriology
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 2005-08
- Volume
- 187
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 5318-5329
- ISSN
- 0021-9193 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-5530
- OpenAlex
- W2041929490
- Cited by
- 203
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 4.72
- 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: Staphylococcus aureus Develops an Alternative, ica- Independent Biofilm in the Absence of the arlRS Two-Component System. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/jb.187.15.5318-5329.2005
- The paper
- Toledo-Arana, A., Merino, N., Vergara-Irigaray, M., Débarbouillé, M., Penadés, J. R., & Lasa, I. (2005). Staphylococcus aureus Develops an Alternative, ica- Independent Biofilm in the Absence of the arlRS Two-Component System. Journal of Bacteriology. https://doi.org/10.1128/jb.187.15.5318-5329.2005
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.