ReviewBioscience reports2023
Models versus pathogens: how conserved is the FtsZ in bacteria?
Review in Bioscience reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Machine learning-guided discovery of spirocyclic inhibitors targeting Mycobacterium tuberculosis FtsZ.Folia microbiologica · 2026Article
- FtsZ contributes to cytoadhesion and interaction with host extracellular matrix components and plasminogen in Mycoplasma bovis.Veterinary research · 2025Article
- FtsZ as a novel target for antibiotics development: Promises and challenges.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2025Review
- Structure, Function, and Regulation of LytA: TheMicroorganisms · 2025Review
- A Predicted Helix-Turn-Helix Core Is Critical for Bacteriophage Kil Peptide to DisruptAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A Review of Antibacterial Candidates with New Modes of Action.ACS infectious diseases · 2024Review
- Article
- Cell division machinery drives cell-specific gene activation during differentiation inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Combating anti-microbial resistance by developing alternative strategies is the need of the hour. Cell division, particularly FtsZ, is being extensively studied for its potential as an alternative target for anti-bacterial therapy. Bacillus subtilis and Escherichia coli are the two well-studied models for research on FtsZ, the leader protein of the cell division machinery. As representatives of gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria, respectively, these organisms have provided an extensive outlook into the process of cell division in rod-shaped bacteria. However, research on other shapes of bacteria, like cocci and ovococci, lags behind that of model rods. Even though most regions of FtsZ show sequence and structural conservation throughout bacteria, the differences in FtsZ functioning and interacting partners establish several different modes of division in different bacteria. In this review, we compare the features of FtsZ and cell division in the model rods B. subtilis and E. coli and the four pathogens: Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pneumoniae, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Reviewing several recent articles on these pathogenic bacteria, we have highlighted the functioning of FtsZ, the unique roles of FtsZ-associated proteins, and the cell division processes in them. Further, we provide a detailed look at the anti-FtsZ compounds discovered and their target bacteria, emphasizing the need for elucidation of the anti-FtsZ mechanism of action in different bacteria. Current challenges and opportunities in the ongoing journey of identifying potent anti-FtsZ drugs have also been described.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.