Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17468168›Full record

ArticleBiophysical journal2007

Intermonolayer friction and surface shear viscosity of lipid bilayer membranes.

W K den Otter, S A Shkulipa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biophysical journal, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing 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

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Forces and Flows at Cell Surfaces.The Journal of membrane biology · 2023
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Sensing a little friction.Biophysical journal · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Assembly and Analysis of Cell-Scale Membrane Envelopes.Journal of chemical information and modeling · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Scaling relationships for the elastic moduli and viscosity of mixed lipid membranes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  12. Saffman-Delbrück and beyond: A pointlike approach.The European physical journal. E, Soft matter · 2019
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The physics of stratum corneum lipid membranes.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2016
    Article
  19. 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

2 authors.

W K den OtterComputational Biophysics, Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands. w.k.denotter@utwente.nl
S A Shkulipa

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The flow behavior of lipid bilayer membranes is characterized by a surface viscosity for in-plane shear deformations, and an intermonolayer friction coefficient for slip between the two leaflets of the bilayer. Both properties have been studied for a variety of coarse-grained double-tailed model lipids, using equilibrium and nonequilibrium molecular dynamics simulations. For lipids with two identical tails, the surface shear viscosity rises rapidly with tail length, while the intermonolayer friction coefficient is less sensitive to the tail length. Interdigitation of lipid tails across the bilayer midsurface, as observed for lipids with two distinct tails, strongly enhances the intermonolayer friction coefficient, but hardly affects the surface shear viscosity. The simulation results are compared against the available experimental data.

Indexed as

Biophysical PhenomenaBiophysicsFrictionLipid BilayersModels, MolecularRheologySurface PropertiesThermodynamicsViscosityLipid Bilayers

Identifiers

PMID17468168
PMCPMC1896239

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.