ArticleBiophysical journal2008
The physical basis for the head-to-tail rule that excludes most fullerene cages from self-assembly.
Article in Biophysical journal, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clathrin Assembly Regulated by Adaptor Proteins in Coarse-Grained Models.Biophysical journal · 2016Article
- Fourth class of convex equilateral polyhedron with polyhedral symmetry related to fullerenes and viruses.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014Article
- Micellization model for the polymerization of clathrin baskets.The Journal of chemical physics · 2013Article
- A geometric constraint, the head-to-tail exclusion rule, may be the basis for the isolated-pentagon rule in fullerenes with more than 60 vertices.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2008Article
- A geometric principle may guide self-assembly of fullerene cages from clathrin triskelia and from carbon atoms.Biophysical journal · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the companion article, we proposed that fullerene cages with head-to-tail dihedral angle discrepancies do not self-assemble. Here we show why. If an edge abuts a pentagon at one end and a hexagon at the other, the dihedral angle about the edge increases, producing a dihedral angle discrepancy (DAD) vector. The DADs about all five/six edges of a central pentagonal/hexagonal face are determined by the identities-pentagon or hexagon-of its five/six surrounding faces. Each "Ring"-central face plus specific surrounding faces-may have zero, two, or four edges with DAD. In most Rings, the nonplanarity induced by DADs is shared among surrounding faces. However, in a Ring that has DADs arranged head of one to tail of another, the nonplanarity cannot be shared, so some surrounding faces would be especially nonplanar. Because the head-to-tail exclusion rule is an implicit geometric constraint, the rule may operate either by imposing a kinetic barrier that prevents assembly of certain Rings or by imposing an energy cost that makes those Rings unlikely to last in an equilibrium circumstance. Since Rings with head-to-tail DADs would be unlikely to self-assemble or last, fullerene cages with those Rings would be unlikely to self-assemble.
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.