Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11371430›Full record

ArticleBiophysical journal2001

A dynamical model of kinesin-microtubule motility assays.

F Gibbons, J F Chauwin, M Despósito, J V José

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biophysical journal, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Biophysical model of self-organized spindle formation patterns without centrosomes and kinetochores.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2006
    Article
  15. Article
  16. 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.

F GibbonsPhysics Department, and Center for Interdisciplinary Research on Complex Systems, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA.
J F Chauwin
M Despósito
J V José

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A two-dimensional stochastic model for the dynamics of microtubules in gliding-assay experiments is presented here, which includes the viscous drag acting on the moving fiber and the interaction with the kinesins. For this purpose, we model kinesin as a spring, and explicitly use parameter values to characterize the model from experimental data. We numerically compute the mean attachment lifetimes of all motors, the total force exerted on the microtubules at all times, the effects of a distribution in the motor speeds, and also the mean velocity of a microtubule in a gliding assay. We find quantitative agreement with the results of J. Howard, A. J. Hudspeth, and R. D. Vale, Nature. 342:154-158. We perform additional numerical analysis of the individual motors, and show how cancellation of the forces exerted by the many motors creates a resultant longitudinal force much smaller than the maximum force that could be exerted by a single motor. We also examine the effects of inhomogeneities in the motor-speeds. Finally, we present a simple theoretical model for microtubules dynamics in gliding assays. We show that the model can be analytically solved in the limit of few motors attached to the microtubule and in the opposite limit of high motor density. We find that the speed of the microtubule goes like the mean speed of the motors in good quantitative agreement with the experimental and numerical results.

Indexed as

Biomechanical PhenomenaComputer SimulationKinesinsMicrotubulesModels, BiologicalMolecular Motor ProteinsMotionStochastic ProcessesViscosityKinesinsMolecular Motor Proteins

Identifiers

PMID11371430
PMCPMC1301441

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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 OpenQuestion graph.