↓ Skip to main content

Molecular Underpinnings of Nitrite Effect on CymA-Dependent Respiration in Shewanella oneidensis

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Molecular Underpinnings of Nitrite Effect on CymA-Dependent Respiration in Shewanella oneidensis
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, July 2016
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2016.01154
Pubmed ID
Authors

Miao Jin, Huihui Fu, Jianhua Yin, Jie Yuan, Haichun Gao

Abstract

Shewanella exhibit a remarkable versatility of respiration, with a diverse array of electron acceptors (EAs). In environments where these bacteria thrive, multiple EAs are usually present. However, we know little about strategies by which these EAs and their interaction affect ecophysiology of Shewanella. In this study, we demonstrate in the model strain, Shewanella oneidensis MR-1, that nitrite, not through nitric oxide to which it may convert, inhibits respiration of fumarate, and probably many other EAs whose reduction depends on quinol dehydrogenase CymA. This is achieved via the repression of cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) production, a second messenger required for activation of cAMP-receptor protein (Crp) which plays a primary role in regulation of respiration. If nitrite is not promptly removed, intracellular cAMP levels drop, and this impairs Crp activity. As a result, the production of nitrite reductase NrfA, CymA, and fumarate reductase FccA is substantially reduced. In contrast, nitrite can be simultaneously respired with trimethylamine N-oxide, resulting in enhanced biomass.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 6%
Unknown 16 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Student > Bachelor 1 6%
Professor 1 6%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 6 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 24%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 6%
Unknown 8 47%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,336,031
of 22,881,154 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#22,510
of 24,911 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#318,478
of 364,404 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#416
of 486 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,154 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,911 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 364,404 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 486 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.