ライフサイエンスコーパス: invader

1 en members of the resident community and the invader.

2 ich cause an epidemic phage infection of the invader.

3 equency-independent prey preferences for the invader.

4 e site of Cas nucleases in the genome of the invader.

5 ion of multiple spacers that target the same invader.

6 s and immunize the host against the matching invader.

7 f cells acquire short DNA sequences from the invader.

8 irect the Cas9 nuclease to its target on the invader.

9 triggers rapid primed adaptation against the invader.

10 sproportionate increases in herbivory on the invader.

11 ify a cleavage site within the genome of the invader.

12 atch between the invaded environment and the invader.

13 ing a competitive advantage in favour of the invader.

14 biological control agent, is now a worldwide invader.

15 invader-degrading Cas protein complex to the invader.

16 ricking neighboring cells into taking up the invader.

17 ident and density-dependent dispersal of the invader.

18 ic pathways in host containment of microbial invaders.

19 species are likely to become the next global invaders.

20 ffered as a reason not to manage troublesome invaders.

21 s in CRISPR arrays to defend against genetic invaders.

22 ost's CRISPR-Cas immune response against its invaders.

23 alls also act as barriers against pathogenic invaders.

24 may create a window of opportunity for these invaders.

25 against bacteria, viruses, and other foreign invaders.

26 gy to defend their cytosol against bacterial invaders.

27 uctions exceeded those induced by non-native invaders.

28 with different microbial pathogens and other invaders.

29 d microorganisms against diverse DNA and RNA invaders.

30 has devised strategies to sequester Mn from invaders.

31 atives based upon traits of the co-occurring invaders.

32 e in the coevolutionary arms race with their invaders.

33 mechanism for dealing with perceived foreign invaders.

34 evolved a variety of defenses against these invaders.

35 is a first line of defense against bacterial invaders.

36 prokaryotes, protecting them against foreign invaders.

37 to protect against a wide array of microbial invaders.

38 t the front lines of resistance to bacterial invaders.

39 arly important determinant of the success of invaders.

40 hat Cas13 can provide immunity against these invaders.

41 cts prokaryotes from viral(1) and plasmid(2) invaders.

42 on to identify and rank the most influential invaders.

43 pecies traits moderate pollen limitation for invaders?

44 reduce establishment of a currently prolific invader (A. petiolata) throughout New England driven by

45 Here, we show that invader abundance alters scale-dependent competitive eff

46 However, only minor ecological impacts of invader abundance and phenotypic traits variation remain

47 At the community level, increasing invader abundance had significantly larger effects on sp

48 The increased invader abundance in AM dominant forests can further fac

49 Manipulation of invader abundance revealed both thresholds and saturatio

50 Invader abundance was more strongly associated with comm

51 posite direction than the effects of reduced invader abundance.

52 d strength of native responses to increasing invader abundance.

53 , with the greatest impacts occurring at low invader abundance.

54 ecological effects of native and non-native invaders across levels of biological organisations and r

55 n hosts on resilience to the colonization of invaders after antibiotic-induced dysbiosis.

56 expand their geographical ranges, whether as invaders, agricultural strains or climate migrants, is c

57 llows for the presence of a larger number of invader alleles at the wave front, where effective popul

58 lied either green leaves of the allelopathic invader Alliaria petiolata, a nonsystemic fungicide to s

59 Invaders allocate more resources to reproduction than na

60 actions between the resident species and the invader along the resource availability gradient.

61 rom reductions in allelopathic traits in the invader and evolution of tolerance in the native.

62 Type III immune response by destroying both invader and host RNAs.

63 leases that degrade the nucleic acid of both invader and host.

64 Type III systems must differentiate between invader and native transcripts to prevent autoimmunity.

65 determined lambdac and lambdaper-year of the invader and of a common native, Trillium erectum.

66 interface, and width of the interface (where invader and resident compete directly) should increase a

67 ter invaders and better defenders; (2) where invader and resident fitness difference is large, invasi

68 locate complementary RNA molecules from the invader and trigger an immune response that eliminates t

69 e short DNA sequences that are captured from invaders and added to the CRISPR array during a process

70 vasion: (1) larger communities evolve better invaders and better defenders; (2) where invader and res

71 scanning the vascular surface for potential invaders and collecting deposited bacteria.

72 ant ungulates enhance demographic success of invaders and depress natives' success, with broad implic

73 crRNAs) that include sequences captured from invaders and direct CRISPR-associated (Cas) proteins to

74 her-connectance food webs tend to host fewer invaders and exert stronger biotic resistance compared t

75 derstanding competitive interactions between invaders and functionally similar native species provide

76 In contrast, consumption by the invaders and higher predator remained additive.

77 by capturing short DNA sequences from these invaders and integrating them into the CRISPR locus of t

78 al conditions, propagule rain, and traits of invaders and invaded communities.

79 Identifying invaders and invasions before their occurrence would arg

80 bodies protect the host against both foreign invaders and its own damaged/apoptotic cells.

81 Invaders and natives were themselves equally susceptible

82 ributes to invasion success, if and only if, invaders and residents are competitively similar; (4) in

83 ve mechanisms designed to neutralize foreign invaders and resolve injury.

84 ortion legume) and trait differences between invaders and the most similar resident species.

85 munity, given their role in the detection of invaders and the subsequent task of activating T cells t

86 and eliminating danger arising from foreign invaders and tissue trauma.

87 del provides a key element to forecast novel invaders and to extend pathway-level risk analyses to in

88 dered proteins and regions to fight flexible invaders and viruses and to successfully overcome the vi

89 tively influence host responses to microbial invaders, and mutations in one pathway frequently disrup

90 ystem to limit the colonization potential of invaders, and they can directly compete through producti

91 a similar effect to increasing the number of invaders; and (5) more diverse communities more successf

92 Invaders are expanding worldwide and extreme drought eve

93 ISPR-associated) genes: sequence segments of invaders are incorporated into host genomes at CRISPR lo

94 Bacterial invaders are sensed either directly, through cytosolic p

95 the immune response induced by the foreign "invader" are important factors in determining the capaci

96 in native populations and communities, while invaders at lower trophic levels had no consistent impac

97 In contrast, invaders at the same trophic level tended to cause a lin

98 To combat these invaders, bacteria possess an arsenal of defenses, such

99 mense evolutionary pressure from their viral invaders-bacteriophages.

100 reveals how to identify the most influential invaders based on statistical measures in dynamically ev

101 The invader became dominant on all plots but attained its hi

102 e mycorrhizal type composition of understory invaders between AM and ECM dominant forests.

103 single-step reactions suggest that following invader binding, branch migration results in a 2:3 parti

104 ly divergent in leaf traits and have greater invader biomass.

105 this was linked to direct inhibition of the invader by antagonistic communities (antibiosis), and to

106 fic competition might slow the advance of an invader by reducing individual performance and overall p

107 Established colonies can therefore resist invaders by outnumbering them.

108 Spread of a locally dispersing invader can become motion of an interface between the in

109 This provides an effective way by which invaders can bypass downstream CRISPR effectors that rel

110 Invaders can escape type I-E CRISPR-Cas immunity in Esch

111 These mechanisms facilitate rapid invader clearance and ensure termination of CRISPR inter

112 vaders, traits of recipient communities, and invader-community interactions.

113 from adaptation should, in general, promote invader competitive ability, empirical demonstrations of

114 lly, a consortium of five cultured bacterial invaders conferred augmented CT-IgA responses in mice fe

115 es have also extensively radiated in counter-invader conflict systems where they serve as nodal nucle

116 In the absence of the higher predator, the invader consumed significantly more basal prey than the

117 erence to predator threat on the part of the invader contributes to its success and impacts within in

118 The presence of this notorious invader could threaten the sustainability of oyster aqua

119 RISPR-derived RNA (crRNA), which directs the invader-degrading Cas protein complex to the invader.

120 unity, the Cas1-2 integrase complex captures invader-derived prespacer DNA and specifically integrate

121 he type I effector helicase and nuclease for invader destruction, Cas3.

122 ied as the nuclease responsible for ultimate invader destruction, is also essential for adaptation.

123 eing riparian specialists, and that riparian invaders disperse in more ways, including by water and h

124 m this locus, and the degradation of cognate invader DNA (protospacer).

125 he Cas1-Cas2 complex integrates fragments of invader DNA as spacers in the CRISPR array.

126 system built from capture and integration of invader DNA into CRISPR (Clustered Regularly Interspaced

127 fection by acquiring 'spacer' sequences from invader DNA into genomic CRISPR loci.

128 ses and plasmids, by specific degradation of invader DNA or RNA.

129 his model, RecG and Cas3 proteins respond to invader DNA replication forks that are blocked by Cascad

130 tion when responding to blocked or collapsed invader DNA replication.

131 Host immunity is based on incorporation of invader DNA sequences in a memory locus (CRISPR), the fo

132 immunity against viruses by capturing short invader DNA sequences, termed spacers, and incorporating

133 In Escherichia coli, Cascade-Cas3 degrades invader DNA to effect immunity, termed 'Interference'.

134 ion systems to discriminate host genome from invader DNA(1).

135 ontrast to most Cas nucleases, which destroy invader DNA(4-7), the type VI effector nuclease Cas13 us

136 king sequence information (PAMs) to identify invader DNA.

137 populations than native species may underlie invader dominance.

138 ns were found above 26.5 degrees N where the invader dominated the community.

139 ly, warming shifted the plant community from invader-dominated to native-dominated but only in the pr

140 nomers have on the recognition efficiency of Invader duplexes.

141 es with a high catabolic similarity with the invader efficiently reduced the invader relative density

142 tions can resist invasion by all multichoice invaders, even while engaging in relatively little punis

143 ing tunable CRISPR immune response to combat invader evolution.

144 Overall, the invader exhibited greater plasticity than native species

145 ta cylindrica), and to determine whether the invader exhibited greater plasticity than six native spe

146 The invader exhibited stronger direct feeding and was also m

147 ve traits over a three-year period after the invaders first arrived.

148 emerge for a wide range of assumptions about invader fitness, competition dynamics, and network struc

149 ed Cas nucleases to the nucleic acids of the invader for their degradation.

150 ISPR response against diversified or related invaders, giving microbes an advantage in the coevolutio

151 t that persistence time can decrease even as invader growth rates (IGRs) increase, which potentially

152 The invader growth was then examined as a function of reside

153 ely similar; (4) increasing the diversity of invaders has a similar effect to increasing the number o

154 preciated, quantifying the impacts of native invaders has important implications because human-assist

155 usly high impact and ecosystem destabilising invader, has rapidly spread across Europe, and is of con

156 Invaders have been documented to modify fire regimes, al

157 comparative methods, we show that successful invaders have fast traits, such as large and frequent cl

158 Biological invaders have long been hypothesized to exhibit the fast

159 se of other publications do not support the 'invader' hypothesis.

160 Solidago canadensis is an aggressive invader in China.

161 he biennial Alliaria petiolata, a widespread invader in eastern North American forests.

162 aea and bacteria by eliminating nucleic acid invaders in a crRNA-guided manner.

163 pests and to modulate responses to specific invaders in a time-of-day-dependent manner (gating).

164 CRISPR-Cas systems eliminate nucleic acid invaders in bacteria and archaea.

165 nd future distributions of four forest plant invaders in Minnesota: common buckthorn (Rhamnus cathart

166 her Type III systems, Cmr eliminates plasmid invaders in Pyrococcus furiosus by a mechanism that depe

167 o successfully identify the most influential invaders in the case of weak selection, while a ranking

168 measurements when assessing the impact of an invader, including density dependence, multifunctionalit

169 possess an array of defenses against foreign invaders, including a broadly distributed bacteriophage

170 cteria are continually challenged by foreign invaders, including bacteriophages, and have evolved a v

171 lizes a diverse array of processes to combat invaders, including the restriction of availability of e

172 equences are captured from the genome of the invader, integrated into the CRISPR locus, and transcrib

173 100 years have been colonized by any of the invaders investigated, despite offering climatically sui

174 nt component of studying and managing forest invaders involves knowing where the species are, or coul

175 proposes that the demographic success of an invader is largely affected by the availability of resou

176 Furthermore, the predicted richness of invaders is 11%-18% significantly lower inside PAs than

177 the mechanism by which Cst complexes silence invaders is unknown.

178 an organism against the myriad of microbial invaders it constantly confronts.

179 Short DNA segments of the invader, known as spacers, are stored in the CRISPR arra

180 nd plasmids based on DNA acquired from these invaders, known as spacers.

181 ms are used by prokaryotes to defend against invaders like viruses and other mobile genetic elements.

182 and provide a fitness advantage to lysogenic invader lineages.

183 e suggests that the successful control of an invader may not necessarily result in beneficial outcome

184 -step sequential model in the presence of an invader mismatch.

185 st efficiently recognize the presence of the invader, mobilize cells to the site of infection, and de

186 sponse is host protective to contain foreign invaders, much of today's pharmacopeia can cause serious

187 When invader mutation blocks this interference activity, Casc

188 ated (Cas) proteins to destroy corresponding invader nucleic acids.

189 nto effector complexes that destroy matching invader nucleic acids.

190 Trait data for 164 taxa showed that invader occupancy was primarily associated with traits o

191 Dominance by exotic invaders occurs with moderate initial frequencies of exo

192 ple act of nutritional warfare, starving the invader of an essential element, is an effective means o

193 Surprisingly, invaders of deciduous forests show the same small-genome

194 sts show the same small-genome tendencies of invaders of more open habitats, supporting genome size a

195 Invaders often have greater rates of production and prod

196 trand displacement synthesis in which short 'invader' oligonucleotides unwind an RNA duplex through a

197 No negative effect of the invader on the resident species was detected.

198 re due to a proportionately larger effect of invaders on common species, suggesting that rare species

199 ably linked to generate positive feedback of invaders on soil systems through stimulating nutrient cy

200 hat lead to AD are derived not from external invaders or amyloid but from oxidative damage of our own

201 s), where they constitutively defend against invaders or are induced to respond to new assaults.

202 R arrays-whether to defend against different invaders or mediate multi-target editing, regulation, im

203 stion is: What is the probability that a new invader (or a new mutant) will take over a resident popu

204 also assessed whether competition with the "invader" or range-expanding species could reduce individ

205 Importance: To contain invaders, particularly RNA viruses, plants have evolved

206 ed to rapidly exert biocidal effects against invader pathobiotic bacteria, such as Porphyromonas ging

207 would facilitate the establishment of alien invaders phylogenetically distinct from the native flora

208 An invader plasmid assay showed that mutation either in the

209 is effective in triggering degradation of an invader plasmid carrying the matching protospacer sequen

210 Invader population growth rates were negative only at th

211 is known about variation in plasticity among invader populations compared with native species.

212 Variation in plasticity among invader populations could inform more precise prediction

213 Principal component analysis revealed that invader populations from different native ranges consist

214 Variation in phenotypic plasticity among invader populations suggests the potential for evolution

215 ion of plasticity, and greater plasticity of invader populations than native species may underlie inv

216 demonstrate that certain pseudocomplementary Invader probe designs result in very efficient and speci

217 The resulting ONs and Invader probes are characterized by thermal denaturation

218 Herein, we introduce pseudocomplementary Invader probes as a step in this direction.

219 Invader probes based on large intercalators efficiently

220 present study, we explore the properties of Invader probes based on larger intercalators, i.e., pery

221 Invader probes have been proposed as alternatives to pol

222 between pseudocomplementary DNA (pcDNA) and Invader probes, which are activated for mixed-sequence d

223 y to recognize and destroy virus and plasmid invaders, prokaryotic CRISPR-Cas systems capture fragmen

224 this, we assessed the growth of a bacterial invader, Ralstonia solanacearum, when introduced into co

225 ity with the invader efficiently reduced the invader relative density, while at high resource availab

226 immune system defends the lung against these invaders remains unclear.

227 Some fungal invaders reported here have been detected in other locat

228 mitation, potentially helping to explain the invaders' reproductive successes.

229 ies in ecosystems challenged by allelopathic invaders: RFS mutualism disruption drives carbon stress,

230 ctioning as a standalone RNase that degrades invader RNA transcripts, but the mechanism linking invad

231 Here we show that invader RNAs also activate the Cmr complex to cleave DNA

232 complex as a novel DNA nuclease activated by invader RNAs containing a crRNA target sequence and a rP

233 complex of the Type III-B Cmr system cleaves invader RNAs recognized by the CRISPR RNA (crRNA ) of th

234 nvaded environment are key predictors of the invader's distribution.

235 PR-associated (Cas) nucleases to destroy the invader's DNA or RNA.

236 ll CRISPR RNAs that are complementary to the invader's genome and specify the targets of RNA-guided C

237 re able to integrate a small sequence of the invader's genome into the CRISPR array(1).

238 nization phase, in which short pieces of the invader's genome, known as spacers, are captured and int

239 h the insertion of a short sequence from the invader's genome, known as the 'spacer', into the CRISPR

240 ssive introgression of local alleles into an invader's genome.

241 niche divergence, which would facilitate the invader's integration into the community and their coexi

242 d both interface width and the most advanced invader's lead scaled with front length.

243 on-native prey displace native prey, then an invader's net influence should depend on both its abunda

244 ptive traits are important in determining an invader's success.

245 , which triggers the degradation of both the invader's transcripts and their template DNA.

246 r RNA transcripts, but the mechanism linking invader sensing to Csm6 activity is not understood.

247 partial Csa (Type I-A) module (lacking known invader sequence acquisition and crRNA processing genes)

248 tection of a complete or partial match to an invader sequence.

249 d the relative location of the most advanced invader should each scale with interface length.

250 The increased litter quantity and quality of invaders should increase nutrient cycling through faster

251 heir genomic CRISPR arrays for use in future invader silencing.

252 valuated as a function of dispersal rate and invader source region relative to a control without nati

253 ects of invasion and impacts associated with invader source region.

254 invasibility relationship that was robust to invader source region.

255 climate change may decrease the barriers to invader species' spread.

256 ons could inform more precise predictions of invader spread and impacts across heterogeneous resource

257 cate that a single base pair mismatch in the invader stalls branch migration and displacement occurs

258 single-stranded segments of DNA to which an invader strand can bind to initiate branch migration, th

259 An "invader" strand binds to the "toehold" overhang of a tar

260 e was found as the main determinant of plant invader success (i.e., establishment, growth, and flower

261 esting that competition is the main limit on invader success at low elevations, as opposed to low-gro

262 provide RNA-guided immunity against genetic invaders such as bacteriophages and plasmids.

263 immune systems that protect prokaryotes from invaders such as viruses and plasmids.

264 iated), to provide resistance against mobile invaders, such as viruses and plasmids.

265 sident species became more important for the invader suppression.

266 QS were less effective at defending against invaders targeted by any of the three CRISPR-Cas systems

267 er adjacent motif (PAM) that is critical for invader targeting.

268 leotide CRISPR repeat sequence tag 5' of the invader-targeting sequence.

269 resistance depends on latitude, habitat and invader taxon, in addition to distinguishing between com

270 When at higher trophic levels, invaders tended to cause a strong, nonlinear decline in

271 rn as they have traits that make them better invaders than their European counterpart (e.g. flight ca

272 ut labile litter, whereas the soils under an invader that input labile litter (kudzu, Pueraria lobata

273 pend on any intraspecific differences of the invader that may alter establishment success.

274 ess in a glasshouse experiment with a forest invader that produces known anti-fungal allelochemicals.

275 S. aureus (MRSA) is a potential bloodstream invader that requires aggressive antimicrobial treatment

276 e new asexual lineages really those powerful invaders that could quickly displace their sexual ancest

277 fungal symbionts (RFSs) for soil resources, invaders that disrupt plant-RFS mutualisms can significa

278 tects bacteria and archaea from nucleic acid invaders through an RNA-mediated nucleic acid cleavage m

279 itions resulting from the introduction of an invader to an ecosystem.

280 Here, the complementarity of the invader to the single-stranded toehold provides the free

281 ems function by acquiring genetic records of invaders to facilitate robust interference upon reinfect

282 We suggest that the phenotypic responses of invaders to the removal programme have strong effects on

283 able certain populations, such as biological invaders, to rapidly transition to novel habitats.

284 ancy was primarily associated with traits of invaders, traits of recipient communities, and invader-c

285 ga maritima discriminates between native and invader transcripts.

286 tion (biotic resistance to a notorious woody invader), underscoring the potential for restoring ecolo

287 Plants perceive microbial invaders using pattern recognition receptors that recogn

288 reveals how to identify the most influential invaders using statistical measures in structured commun

289 Plants can detect invaders via the recognition of pathogen-associated mole

290 e generally decreased as the mismatch in the invader was encountered earlier in displacement.

291 eclines of H. sanguineus at sites where this invader was once much more abundant.

292 We found that the relative density of the invader was reduced by increasing resident community ric

293 Whilst impacts are well-documented for many invaders, we lack tools to predict biotic resistance and

294 The impacts of native invaders were primarily manifested at the individual lev

295 n successfully identify the most influential invaders when the selection strength is weak, while more

296 mpetitive effect of a resident species on an invader, which may hamper further range expansion.

297 ce against the competitive effects of strong invaders, which likely promoted their persistence in inv

298 based on their state of adaptation to repel invaders while recruiting beneficial resident bacteria t

299 ccessful early in stand development, whereas invaders with conservative carbon capture strategies per

300 Annuals and invaders with high-specific leaf area were only successf