ArticlePloS one2026
Staphylococcus aureus agr-type vs genetic background: molecular signatures determining differential metabolism and virulence potential.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In Staphylococcus aureus, the quorum‑sensing accessory gene regulator (agr) system is the major virulence regulator. The four agr‑types (I-IV) have been associated with distinct infection outcomes, but their direct contribution to virulence regulation and metabolism has remained unresolved due to tight linkage between agr‑type and genetic background. To disentangle agr‑type‑specific effects, we used congenic Newman strains in which the native agr-locus has been replaced with each of the four agr-types, alongside a [Formula: see text]agr mutant. We performed RNA‑sequencing during early exponential (1h30), late exponential (6h), and stationary (12h) growth phases. Despite similar growth kinetics, agr‑types displayed distinct activation profiles based on agrA and RNAIII expressions. Agr-I and agr-IV showed early, strong expressions, agr-II displayed intermediate expressions and agr-III initiated weak expressions only in stationary phase. This agr‑type‑dependent activation timing was the dominant driver of global transcriptional changes. Early activation in agr‑I and agr‑IV induced robust expression of phenol‑soluble modulins, capsule biosynthesis genes, and pore‑forming toxins, whereas agr‑II and agr‑III expressed delayed or alternative virulence pathways, including upregulation of superantigen‑like genes. Among all types, agr‑IV exhibited the broadest transcriptional response, encompassing both virulence and metabolic pathways, including differential regulation of nucleotide and fructose metabolisms. Pairwise differential expression, over‑representation analysis, and gene‑set enrichment consistently revealed agr‑type‑specific virulence and metabolic programs. Agr‑III, which activated latest and weakest, showed limited transcriptional change until stationary phase, whereas agr‑I, agr‑II, and agr‑IV displayed progressively broader virulence and metabolic remodeling. Together, these findings demonstrate that agr‑type determines virulence and metabolic gene expression profiles primarily by dictating the timing and magnitude of agr-activation, even within an identical genetic background and growth environment. This work provides a systematic framework for understanding agr‑type‑specific regulatory strategies and their potential roles in S. aureus pathogenesis.
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.