Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37969749›Full record

ArticleBio-protocol2023

Spot Assay and Colony Forming Unit (CFU) Analyses-based sensitivity test for

Satya Ranjan Sahu, Bhabasha Gyanadeep Utkalaja, Shraddheya Kumar Patel, Narottam Acharya

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bio-protocol, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Assessing Sensitivity to Antifungal Plant Compounds or Agrochemicals.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2027
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Satya Ranjan SahuLaboratory of Genomic Instability and Diseases, Department of Infectious Disease Biology, Institute of Life Sciences, Bhubaneswar, India.
Bhabasha Gyanadeep UtkalajaLaboratory of Genomic Instability and Diseases, Department of Infectious Disease Biology, Institute of Life Sciences, Bhubaneswar, India.
Shraddheya Kumar PatelLaboratory of Genomic Instability and Diseases, Department of Infectious Disease Biology, Institute of Life Sciences, Bhubaneswar, India.
Narottam AcharyaLaboratory of Genomic Instability and Diseases, Department of Infectious Disease Biology, Institute of Life Sciences, Bhubaneswar, India.
Institute of Life Sciences · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cellular sensitivity is an approach to inhibit the growth of certain cells in response to any non-permissible conditions, as the presence of a cytotoxic agent or due to changes in growth parameters such as temperature, salt, or media components. Sensitivity tests are easy and informative assays to get insight into essential gene functions in various cellular processes. For example, cells having any functionally defective genes involved in DNA replication exhibit sensitivity to non-permissive temperatures and to chemical agents that block DNA replication fork movement. Here, we describe a sensitivity test for multiple strains of

Indexed as

Antifungal drugsCandidaCell survivalColony forming unitsDNA damaging agentsDNA polymerase knockoutsDNA replication inhibitorsFungiGenotoxic stressHydroxyureaMethyl methanesulfonateSaccharomycesSpot assaysTemperature sensitivity

Identifiers

PMID37969749
PMCPMC10632158
OpenAlexW4388418230

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.