戻る
「早戻しボタン」を押すと検索画面に戻ります。 [閉じる]

コーパス検索結果 (１語後でソート)

通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 /absence of insertion sequences and a type I restriction modification system.
2 , but it does not appear to be part of a DNA restriction-modification system.
3 , and confers fitness benefits via a type II restriction-modification system.
4 ular lactate, and modification of the type I restriction-modification system.
5 and C.BclI, a controller protein of the BclI restriction-modification system.
6  to be the endonuclease component of a novel restriction-modification system.
7 eria, it does not appear to be part of a DNA restriction-modification system.
8  methyltransferase that is not part of a DNA restriction/modification system.
9 ompetitive inhibitor of the bacterial type I restriction/modification system.
10  for a methyltransferase from a model type I restriction/modification system.
11 ases, those whose function lies outside of a restriction/modification system.
12 nity featuring several simultaneously active restriction modification systems.
13 clude blocking phage attachment, CRISPR, and restriction modification systems.
14 15 nucleotides in the TfiTok6A1I and Tsp32IR restriction-modification systems.
15 A repair like CRISPR-associated proteins and restriction-modification systems.
16 ss DNA methyltransferases from a bacterium's restriction-modification systems.
17 ection that could be in part due to numerous restriction-modification systems.
18 CCWGG motifs as a marker of self DNA akin to restriction-modification systems.
19 at are now termed Type I, II, III and IV DNA restriction-modification systems.
20 tions such as those observed with the Type I Restriction-Modification systems.
21 ors, called C proteins, controls a subset of restriction-modification systems.
22 nized) acting independently or together with restriction-modification systems.
23 d disease processes, as well as in bacterial restriction-modification systems.
24 strains in nature vary dramatically in their restriction-modification systems.
25 in because of their sensitivity to bacterial restriction-modification systems.
26  which in turn, are rarely incorporated into restriction/modification systems.
27 is, cell-surface-associated proteins and DNA restriction/modification systems.
28 several strategies to defeat host CRISPR and restriction-modification systems(3-10), but no mechanism
29         VPI-2 encodes a P4-like integrase, a restriction modification system, a Mu phage-like region,
30 ; these include a previously uncharacterized restriction-modification system, a nuclease-helicase com
31 ic DNA in cells carrying the wild-type EcoRI restriction-modification system: (a) binding to EcoRI* s
32    Correspondingly, two loci encoding Type I restriction-modification systems able to change their sp
33                                          The Restriction-modification system AhdI contains two conver
34                      For the hpyV and hpyAIV restriction-modification systems, an in-depth analysis o
35  favoring simple immunity featuring a single restriction modification system and the second strategy
36 ound on plasmids, including those encoding a restriction-modification system and arsenic resistance,
37 fic genes such as genes involved in a type I restriction-modification system and CAZymes belonging to
38 ned and expressed the ahdIC gene of the AhdI restriction-modification system and have purified the re
39 oth systems are closely related to the PvuII restriction-modification system and share its target spe
40 re are barriers to genetic transfer, such as restriction-modification systems and CRISPR loci, that l
41 may contribute to genetic variability, i.e., restriction-modification systems and integrases.
42 ches in DNA is key for maintaining bacterial restriction/modification systems and gene silencing in h
43 mology to DNA methyltransferases of type III restriction/modification systems and has 40 tetranucleot
44 , as a counter-defense against the bacterial restriction-modification system, and annotated as a SAM
45 n, we infer the existence of a mycobacterial restriction-modification system, and identify filamentat
46 rast to M. jannaschii, A. fulgidus has fewer restriction-modification systems, and none of its genes
47 lleviation may be a characteristic of Type I restriction-modification systems, and that it can be ach
48                               Phase-variable restriction-modification systems are a feature of a dive
49                                              Restriction-modification systems are well-studied defens
50                                   Type I DNA restriction/modification systems are oligomeric enzymes
51 tes, SfiI displays all of the hallmarks of a restriction-modification system as opposed to a recombin
52      We also identified a number of putative restriction-modification systems, bacteriophage genes an
53 rain-specific motifs or difference in active restriction modification systems between the two strains
54 er of MTase genes, presumably with the whole restriction-modification systems, between Bacteria and A
55                           However, if type I restriction-modification systems bind to unmodified targ
56 tal role in shaping bacterial evolution, and restriction-modification systems can modulate this flow.
57 ISARM (Defense Island System Associated with Restriction-Modification) systems can provide protection
58            We conclude that PV of a Type IIG restriction-modification system causes changes in site-s
59                                      Type II restriction-modification systems cleave and methylate DN
60  HGTs appear to encode transposase activity, restriction-modification system components, and biofilm
61                                     The BcgI restriction-modification system consists of two subunits
62 rge fraction of bacterial species as part of restriction-modification systems, each composed of a met
63                Most bacterial genomes harbor restriction-modification systems, encoding a REase and i
64 striction (R) and methylase (M) genes of the Restriction-Modification system Esp1396I are tightly reg
65 sm is proposed for the evolution of the NaeI restriction-modification system from a topoisomerase/lig
66                                     The BslI restriction-modification system from Bacillus species wa
67 ave isolated and characterized the genes for restriction-modification systems from two species of Sal
68                DNA modification, mediated by restriction-modification systems, functions as an immune
69          The cloning and sequencing of BsoBI restriction-modification system has been described by Ru
70 sporters, cryptic phages, and three types of restriction-modification systems have been identified in
71                                              Restriction-modification systems have been identified in
72                                          Two restriction-modification systems have been previously di
73                                              Restriction-modification systems have to distinguish bet
74 ch systems, which include the CRISPR-Cas and restriction-modification systems, have proven to be inva
75                                   A type IIs restriction-modification system, hpyIIRM, was active in
76 ion efficiencies suggested the presence of a restriction-modification system in F. nucleatum.
77 which recognizes GAATTC and is a member of a restriction-modification system in Rhodobacter sphaeroid
78 i encodes a homologue of an unusual Type IIG restriction-modification system in which the endonucleas
79                 We conclude that the type II restriction-modification systems in H. pylori are highly
80  transformation are numerous strain-specific restriction-modification systems in H. pylori.
81 ng the inner barriers to transformation were restriction-modification systems in M. xanthus, which co
82 alysis of phase-variable Type I and Type III restriction-modification systems in multiple human-adapt
83 e identified methylation motifs that control Restriction-Modification systems, including GATC of the
84  has important functions beyond the roles in restriction-modification systems, including the ability
85                             We conclude that restriction-modification systems inhibit the genomic int
86                                    The PvuII restriction-modification system is a type II system, whi
87           Therefore, the thermophilic Tsp45I restriction-modification system is plasmid-borne within
88 ole of facilitated diffusion in this type II restriction-modification system is proposed.
89 he phage from the defensive action of type I restriction-modification systems, is also active against
90 ion sequence (IS) elements, that encodes the restriction/modification system LlaI and carries an abor
91 bits low %G+C and encodes proteins of phage, restriction modification systems, mobile elements, and o
92  transfer and can function either as part of restriction-modification systems or in apparent isolatio
93                              However, unlike restriction-modification systems, phage DNA does not app
94 ble system of Bacteroides fragilis, a Type I restriction modification system (R-M).
95 rial genomes (Labrie et al, 2010), including restriction-modification systems (R-M) (Tock & Dryden, 2
96 n identified in bacterial genomes, including restriction-modification systems (R-M), abortive infecti
97                  In bacteria, CRISPR-Cas and restriction-modification systems recognize non-self nucl
98                                    The PspGI restriction-modification system recognizes the sequence
99                               CRISPR-Cas and restriction-modification systems represent the core defe
100 xin system, DarTG2, embedded within a Type I restriction-modification system (RMS).
101                                              Restriction-Modification systems (RMS) are one of the ma
102 e systems, in particular toxin-antitoxin and restriction-modification systems, show nonrandom cluster
103 nsists of genetic rearrangements in a Type I restriction-modification system (SpnD39III).
104 ldarius, the mode of GGCC methylation by its restriction-modification system, SuaI, was investigated.
105                                     Type IIB restriction-modification systems, such as BcgI, feature
106  chromosome via recombination between type I restriction modification system (T1RMS) genes, and the a
107 n recombination in the hsdS gene of a type I restriction modification system that altered DNA methyla
108 has considerable parallel to prokaryotic DNA restriction modification system that transforms nucleic
109     An extensive analysis is included of the restriction-modification systems that are predicted to b
110              There are increasing reports of restriction-modification systems that exhibit phase-vari
111     Finally, we describe examples of Type II restriction-modification systems that have features in c
112 toxA flanking DNA contained a homologue of a restriction/modification system that was shown to be fun
113 spite the pronounced similarity of the three restriction-modification systems, the flanking sequences
114 known about the distribution and movement of restriction-modification systems themselves.
115 lts support generalization of the concept of restriction-modification system to the concept of self-r
116 ethylation in bacteria, represents a part of restriction-modification systems to discriminate host ge
117 target nucleic acids, such as CRISPR-Cas and restriction-modification systems, to replicate efficient
118 g frames with homology to enterotoxin genes, restriction-modification systems, transposases, and seve
119 cificity subunit of hetero-oligomeric type I restriction-modification systems) was significantly high
120 ains of Escherichia coli expressing the SfiI restriction-modification system were transformed with pl
121 nes encoding surface-associated proteins and restriction-modification systems were especially diverse
122                                 These type I restriction-modification systems were originally identif
123 t this bias was in part due to the action of restriction-modification systems, whereas genome feature
124 epresents a minimal approach to assembling a restriction-modification system wherein a single DNA rec
125 n DNA, including extensive CRISPR arrays and restriction-modification systems, which may indicate the
126 e 10.9 kbp ICE encodes an expressed Type IIG restriction-modification system with a sequence specific
127 involvement of PT modifications in a type of restriction-modification system with wide distribution i
128 ided the starting point for the evolution of restriction-modification systems with novel sequence spe

 
Page Top