ArticleJournal of anatomy2003
Effects of microinjected small GTPases on the actin cytoskeleton of human neutrophils.
Article in Journal of anatomy, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Leishmania donovani requires functional Cdc42 and Rac1 to prevent phagosomal maturation.Infection and immunity · 2006Article
- RhoGTPases and p53 are involved in the morphological appearance and interferon-alpha response of hairy cells.The American journal of pathology · 2006Article
- Pseudopod projection and cell spreading of passive leukocytes in response to fluid shear stress.Biophysical journal · 2004Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
This paper describes a method for microinjection of proteins (Rho GTPases) into neutrophils and observations on the responses of the cells to these injections. Neutrophils are extremely difficult to inject because of their small size, complex morphology and fragility. To allow microinjections they must be cultured on a substrate that enables them to settle, adhere and spread. We determined that fibronectin- and/or collagen-coated coverslips are the best substrates and we used very fine needles and short microinjection times to minimize cell damage. These methods permitted us to inject up to 100 cells in a single preparation over a period of 30 min. Effects of microinjection were assessed by using tetramethylrhodamine isothiocyanate (TRITC)-phalloidin to label F-actin filaments, and observation by fluorescence and confocal scanning microscopy. Microinjection alone resulted in cell rounding and some changes in the F-actin cytoskeleton but injected cells remained adherent at the substrate, were able to respond to microinjected GTPases (V12Rac, V14RhoA, V12Cdc42) and continued to be responsive to activation by exposure to fMet-Leu-Phe (fMLP) or O-tetradecanoylphorbal 13-acetate (TPA). V12Rac caused an increase in neutrophil membrane ruffling and short protrusions from the cell membrane, whereas V14RhoA induced a large increase in punctate F-actin structures. V12Cdc42 produced focal condensation of F-actin and induced the formation of small microspikes. The differences between these responses of neutrophils and those of other similarly treated cell types are discussed. Our findings demonstrate that microinjection is a valuable technique for studying the role of individual proteins in neutrophils.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.