The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Persisters: a distinct physiological state of E. coli
Open accessAbstract
Background: Bacterial populations contain persisters, phenotypic variants that constitute approximately 1% of cells in stationary phase and biofilm cultures. Multidrug tolerance of persisters is largely responsible for the inability of antibiotics to completely eradicate infections. Recent progress in understanding persisters is encouraging, but the main obstacle in understanding their nature was our inability to isolate these elusive cells from a wild-type population since their discovery in 1944. Results: We hypothesized that persisters are dormant cells with a low level of translation, and used this to physically sort dim E. coli cells which do not contain sufficient amounts of unstable GFP expressed from a promoter whose activity depends on the growth rate. The dim cells were tolerant to antibiotics and exhibited a gene expression profile distinctly different from those observed for cells in exponential or stationary phases. Genes coding for toxin-antitoxin module proteins were expressed in persisters and are likely contributors to this condition. Conclusion: We report a method for persister isolation and conclude that these cells represent a distinct state of bacterial physiology.
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
Bacterial Biofilms: A Common Cause of Persistent Infections
Costerton, J. W., Stewart, P. S., & Greenberg, E. P. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.284.5418.1318 · Cited by 12,167
Bacterial Persistence as a Phenotypic Switch
Balaban, N. Q., Merrin, J., Chait, R., Kowalik, L., & Leibler, S. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1099390 · Cited by 2,952 · cited 1×
“(page number not for citation purposes) which account for the majority of infectious diseases in the developed world [6,7].”
BackgroundMicroarray data normalization and transformation
Quackenbush, J. (2002) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng1032 · Cited by 1,975
Cited by
Persister cells, dormancy and infectious disease
Lewis, K. (2007) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro1557 · Cited by 2,052
Self-citationLewis, K. (2010) · Annual Review of Microbiology · doi:10.1146/annurev.micro.112408.134306 · Cited by 1,858
Self-citationDistinguishing between resistance, tolerance and persistence to antibiotic treatment
Brauner, A., Fridman, O., Gefen, O., & Balaban, N. Q. (2016) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro.2016.34 · Cited by 1,612
Platforms for antibiotic discovery
Lewis, K. (2013) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd3975 · Cited by 1,445
Self-citationPersistent bacterial infections and persister cells
Fisher, R. A., Gollan, B., & Helaine, S. (2017) · Nature Reviews Microbiology · doi:10.1038/nrmicro.2017.42 · Cited by 1,243
Metadata
- Authors
- Shah, D., Zhang, Z., Khodursky, A. B., Kaldalu, N., Kurg, K., & Lewis, K.
- Venue
- BMC Microbiology
- Published
- 2006-06-12
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 1471-2180
- OpenAlex
- W2145676608
- Cited by
- 629
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 10.43
- 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: Persisters: a distinct physiological state of E. coli. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1471-2180-6-53
- The paper
- Shah, D., Zhang, Z., Khodursky, A. B., Kaldalu, N., Kurg, K., & Lewis, K. (2006). Persisters: a distinct physiological state of E. coli. BMC Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2180-6-53
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.