Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15456512›Full record

ReviewBMC cell biology2004

Control and maintenance of mammalian cell size.

Stephen Cooper

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC cell biology, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. What programs the size of animal cells?Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Cell size control driven by the circadian clock and environment in cyanobacteria.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Cell biology. On being the right (cell) size.Science (New York, N.Y.) · 2015
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Stephen CooperDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-0620, USA. cooper@umich.edu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundConlon and Raff propose that mammalian cells grow linearly during the division cycle. According to Conlon and Raff, cells growing linearly do not need a size checkpoint to maintain a constant distribution of cell sizes. If there is no cell-size-control system, then exponential growth is not allowed, as exponential growth, according to Conlon and Raff, would require a cell-size-control system. DISCUSSION: A reexamination of the model and experiments of Conlon and Raff indicates that exponential growth is fully compatible with cell size maintenance, and that mammalian cells have a system to regulate and maintain cell size that is related to the process of S-phase initiation. Mammalian cell size control and its relationship to growth rate-faster growing cells are larger than slower growing cells-is explained by the initiation of S phase occurring at a relatively constant cell size coupled with relatively invariant S- and G2-phase times as interdivision time varies. SUMMARY: This view of the mammalian cell cycle, the continuum model, explains the mass growth pattern during the division cycle, size maintenance, size determination, and the kinetics of cell-size change following a shift-up from slow to rapid growth.

Indexed as

Cell Physiological PhenomenaCell SizeAnimalsMammals

Identifiers

PMID15456512
PMCPMC524481

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.