(p)ppGpp: still magical?

By K. Potrykus, M. Cashel. Annual Review of Microbiology, 2008

1,166 citations recorded by the source corpus.

The fundamental details of how nutritional stress leads to elevating (p)ppGpp are questionable. By common usage, the meaning of the stringent response has evolved from the specific response to (p)ppGpp provoked by amino acid starvation to all responses caused by elevating (p)ppGpp by any means. Different responses have similar as well as dissimilar positive and negative effects on gene expression and metabolism. The different ways that different bacteria seem to exploit their capacities to form and respond to (p)ppGpp are already impressive despite an early stage of discovery. Apparently, (p)ppGpp can contribute to regulation of many aspects of microbial cell biology that are sensitive to changing nutrient availability: growth, adaptation, secondary metabolism, survival, persistence, cell division, motility, biofilms, development, competence, and virulence. Many basic questions still exist. This review tries to focus on some issues that linger even for the most widely characterized bacterial strains.

Subfields: Food Science, Genetics, Molecular Medicine

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/37bda10b65f9ca855717d91098c933a1e8dd7627

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Food Science

  1. Jan Kok
  2. D. van Sinderen
  3. J. Oliver
  4. W. J. Kenyon
  5. M. Spector

In Genetics

  1. Shane C. Dillon
  2. Bernd H. A. Rehm
  3. C. Dorman
  4. S. Ghods
  5. W. J. Kenyon
  6. M. Spector
  7. M. F. Moradali

In Molecular Medicine

  1. Andrew D. S. Cameron
  2. Bernd H. A. Rehm
  3. S. Ghods
  4. M. F. Moradali

Citations in the corpus