↓ Skip to main content

Bacillus subtilis IolQ (DegA) is a transcriptional repressor of iolX encoding NAD+-dependent scyllo-inositol dehydrogenase

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Microbiology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
8 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
Bacillus subtilis IolQ (DegA) is a transcriptional repressor of iolX encoding NAD+-dependent scyllo-inositol dehydrogenase
Published in
BMC Microbiology, July 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12866-017-1065-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dong-Min Kang, Christophe Michon, Tetsuro Morinaga, Kosei Tanaka, Shinji Takenaka, Shu Ishikawa, Ken-ichi Yoshida

Abstract

Bacillus subtilis is able to utilize at least three inositol stereoisomers as carbon sources, myo-, scyllo-, and D-chiro-inositol (MI, SI, and DCI, respectively). NAD(+)-dependent SI dehydrogenase responsible for SI catabolism is encoded by iolX. Even in the absence of functional iolX, the presence of SI or MI in the growth medium was found to induce the transcription of iolX through an unknown mechanism. Immediately upstream of iolX, there is an operon that encodes two genes, yisR and iolQ (formerly known as degA), each of which could encode a transcriptional regulator. Here we performed an inactivation analysis of yisR and iolQ and found that iolQ encodes a repressor of the iolX transcription. The coding sequence of iolQ was expressed in Escherichia coli and the gene product was purified as a His-tagged fusion protein, which bound to two sites within the iolX promoter region in vitro. IolQ is a transcriptional repressor of iolX. Genetic evidences allowed us to speculate that SI and MI might possibly be the intracellular inducers, however they failed to antagonize DNA binding of IolQ in in vitro experiments.

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 8 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 8 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Lecturer 1 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 13%
Student > Bachelor 1 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 13%
Researcher 1 13%
Other 1 13%
Unknown 2 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 1 13%
Unknown 2 25%
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 12 July 2017.
All research outputs
#20,434,884
of 22,988,380 outputs
Outputs from BMC Microbiology
#2,700
of 3,206 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#272,460
of 312,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Microbiology
#44
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,988,380 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 3,206 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. 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 312,555 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 54 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.