Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 235

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparative genomics of freshwater Fe-oxidizing bacteria: implications for physiology, ecology, and systematics

Open access
Emerson, David, Field, Erin K., Chertkov, Olga, Davenport, Karen W., Goodwin, Lynne, Munk, Christine, Nolan, Matt, Woyke, Tanja·2013·Frontiers in Microbiology

Abstract

The two microaerophilic, Fe-oxidizing bacteria (FeOB) Sideroxydans ES-1 and Gallionella ES-2 have single circular chromosomes of 3.00 and 3.16 Mb that encode 3049 and 3006 genes, respectively. Multi-locus sequence analysis (MLSA) confirmed the relationship of these two organisms to one another, and indicated they may form a novel order, the Gallionellalaes, within the Betaproteobacteria. Both are adapted for chemolithoautotropy, including pathways for CO2-fixation, and electron transport pathways adapted for growth at low O2-levels, an important adaptation for growing on Fe(II). Both genomes contain Mto-genes implicated in iron-oxidation, as well as other genes that could be involved in Fe-oxidation. Nearly 10% of their genomes are devoted to environmental sensing, signal transduction, and chemotaxis, consistent with their requirement for growing in narrow redox gradients of Fe(II) and O2. There are important differences as well. Sideroxydans ES-1 is more metabolically flexible, and can utilize reduced S-compounds, including thiosulfate, for lithotrophic growth. It has a suite of genes for nitrogen fixation. Gallionella ES-2 contains additional gene clusters for exopolysaccharide production, and has more capacity to resist heavy metals. Both strains contain genes for hemerythrins and globins, but ES-1 has an especially high numbers of these genes that may be involved in oxygen homeostasis, or storage. The two strains share homology with the marine FeOB Mariprofundus ferrooxydans PV-1 in CO2 fixation genes, and respiratory genes. In addition, ES-1 shares a suite of 20 potentially redox active genes with PV-1, as well as a large prophage. Combined these genetic, morphological, and physiological differences indicate that these are two novel species, Sideroxydans lithotrophicus ES-1(T) (ATCC 700298(T); JCM 14762; DSMZ 22444; NCMA B100), and Gallionella capsiferriformans ES-2(T) (ATCC 700299(T); JCM 14763; DSMZ 22445; NCMA B101).

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fmicb.2013.00254

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 235

Metadata

Authors
Emerson, D., Field, E. K., Chertkov, O., Davenport, K. W., Goodwin, L., Munk, C., Nolan, M., & Woyke, T.
Venue
Frontiers in Microbiology
Published
2013
Volume
4
Pages
254-254
ISSN
1664-302X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2139523380
Cited by
235
References
4
FWCI
8.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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 of freshwater Fe-oxidizing bacteria: implications for physiology, ecology, and systematics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3389/fmicb.2013.00254
The paper
Emerson, D., Field, E. K., Chertkov, O., Davenport, K. W., Goodwin, L., Munk, C., Nolan, M., & Woyke, T. (2013). Comparative genomics of freshwater Fe-oxidizing bacteria: implications for physiology, ecology, and systematics. Frontiers in Microbiology. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2013.00254

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.