Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16299071›Full record

ArticleBiophysical journal2006

Chemical modification of the bacterial porin OmpF: gain of selectivity by volume reduction.

Maarten Vrouenraets, Jenny Wierenga, Wim Meijberg, Henk Miedema

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biophysical journal, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Ionizable side chains at catalytic active sites of enzymes.European biophysics journal : EBJ · 2012
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Multiple Scales in the Simulation of Ion Channels and Proteins.The journal of physical chemistry. C, Nanomaterials and interfaces · 2010
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Engineering channels: atomic biology.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2008
    Article
  20. 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.

Maarten VrouenraetsBiomade Technology Foundation, Nijenborgh 4, 9747 AG Groningen, The Netherlands.
Jenny Wierenga
Wim Meijberg
Henk Miedema

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

OmpF is an essentially nonselective porin isolated from the outer membrane of Escherichia coli. Here we report on the manipulation of the ion selectivity of OmpF by chemical modification with MTS reagents (MTSET, MTSEA, and MTSES) and the (rather bulky) tripeptide glutathione, all cysteine specific. When recorded in a gradient of 0.1//1 M CaCl2 or 0.1//1 M NaCl, pH 7.4 solutions, measured reversal potentials of the most cation-selective modified mutants were (virtually) identical to the Nernst potential of Ca2+ or Na+. Compared to this full cation selectivity, the anion-selective modified mutants performed somewhat less but nevertheless showed high anion selectivity. We conclude that a low permanent charge in combination with a narrow pore can render the same selectivity as a highly charged but wider pore. These results favor the view that both the electrostatic potential arising form the fixed charge in the pore and the space available at the selectivity filter contribute to the charge selection (i.e., cation versus anion selectivity) of a biological ion channel.

Indexed as

Amino AcidsCysteineElectrophysiologyEscherichia coliEthyl MethanesulfonateGlutathioneIon Channel GatingMutationPeptidesPorinsSensitivity and SpecificityAmino AcidsCysteineEthyl MethanesulfonateGlutathioneOmpF proteinPeptidesPorins

Identifiers

PMID16299071
PMCPMC1367271

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.