Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12516860›Full record

ReviewPlant molecular biology2002

Protein-protein interactions in the secretory pathway, a growing demand for experimental approaches in vivo.

Peter Pimpl, Jurgen Denecke

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Plant molecular biology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Peter PimplCentrefor Plant Sciences, Faculty of Biological Sciences, The University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, United Kingdom.
Jurgen Denecke

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The function of the secretory pathway is dependent on multiple protein-protein interactions at various stages. Currently, such interactions are mainly studied using physical methods that document direct contact or affinity in vitro. The development of vital fluorescence imaging as well as quantitative protein transport assays opens up the implementation of in vivo approaches which can be used to verify models based on in vitro work. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the various approaches involving living cells to resolve interactions between proteins that control complex mechanisms. In particular, it is illustrated how combinations of several methods can establish whether postulated interactions are of biological relevance or due to artefacts inherent to the experimental set-up.

Indexed as

COP-Coated VesiclesEndoplasmic ReticulumGolgi ApparatusGreen Fluorescent ProteinsLuminescent ProteinsMicroscopy, FluorescenceModels, BiologicalPlant ProteinsProtein BindingProtein TransportRecombinant Fusion ProteinsSecretory VesiclesGreen Fluorescent ProteinsLuminescent ProteinsPlant ProteinsRecombinant Fusion Proteins

Identifiers

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.