ReviewEssays in biochemistry2026
Imaging nucleic acids in biofilms.
Review in Essays in biochemistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A special issue of Essays in Biochemistry on the social lives of bacteria.Essays in biochemistry · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Extracellular nucleic acids (eNA) are ubiquitous components of bacterial biofilms, contributing to structural integrity, antimicrobial resistance, and immune evasion. While traditionally viewed as extracellular DNA in the canonical B-form, recent discoveries reveal remarkable structural diversity within biofilm matrices, including left-handed Z-DNA, G-quadruplexes, i-motifs, triplexes, and extracellular RNA. These non-canonical structures possess emergent properties distinct from B-DNA: they resist degradation by mammalian DNase I, they form catalytically active DNAzymes with peroxidase activity, and they serve as conduits for extracellular electron transfer. Despite their biological significance, these structures have been largely overlooked due to limitations in visualisation methods. The present review critically evaluates current tools for imaging eNA in biofilms, with emphasis on fluorescent DNA-binding dyes and structure-specific immunolabelling approaches. The widely used DNA-binding dyes, such as propidium iodide and TOTO™-1, exhibit strong structural biases and render non-canonical structures invisible. This has important implications for interpreting nuclease treatment outcomes and biofilm composition. We provide practical guidance for comprehensive eNA visualisation, recommending integration of multiple detection methods: combining far-red dyes with TOTO™-1 for broad structural coverage and validating findings with commercial monoclonal antibodies (Z22, BG4, 1H6, iMab, Jel466, and J2) alongside functional assays. Understanding eNA structural diversity and developing appropriate detection tools are essential for rational design of structure-specific nuclease therapeutics targeting biofilm infections.
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.