Evidence map›Paper›PMID 156729›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of cell biology1979

Chick brain actin and myosin. Isolation and characterization.

E R Kuczmarski, J L Rosenbaum

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of cell biology, 1979. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Actin from pig and rat uterus.The Biochemical journal · 1981
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

E R Kuczmarski
J L Rosenbaum
Yale University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Brain actin extracted from an acetone powder of chick brains was purified by a cycle of polymerization-depolymerization followed by molecular sieve chromatography. The brain actin had a subunit molecular weight of 42,000 daltons as determined by co-electrophoresis with muscle actin. It underwent salt-dependent g to f transformation to form double helical actin filaments which could be "decorated" by muscle myosin subfragment 1. A critical concentration for polymerization of 1.3 microM was determined by measuring either the change in viscosity or absorbance at 232 nm. Brain actin was also capable of stimulating the ATPase activity of muscle myosin. Brain myosin was isolated from whole chick brain by a procedure involving high salt extraction, ammonium sulfate fractionation and molecular sieve chromatography. The purified myosin was composed of a 200,000-dalton heavy chain and three lower molecular weight light chains. In 0.6 M KCl the brain myosin had ATPase activity which was inhibited by Mg++, stimulated by Ca++, and maximally activated by EDTA. When dialyzed against 0.1 M KCl, the brain myosin self-assembled into short bipolar filaments. The bipolar filaments associated with each other to form long concatamers, and this association was enhanced by high concentrations of Mg++ ion. The brain myosin did not interact with chicken skeletal muscle myosin to form hybrid filaments. Furthermore, antibody recognition studies demonstrated that myosins from chicken brain, skeletal muscle, and smooth muscle were unique.

Indexed as

Brain ChemistryActinsAdenosine TriphosphatasesAnimalsChickensMolecular WeightMusclesMyosinsActinsAdenosine TriphosphatasesMyosins

Identifiers

PMID156729
PMCPMC2110348
OpenAlexW2114333525

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.