Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18157545›Full record

ReviewPflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology2008

High-speed AFM and nano-visualization of biomolecular processes.

Toshio Ando, Takayuki Uchihashi, Noriyuki Kodera, Daisuke Yamamoto, Atsushi Miyagi, Masaaki Taniguchi, Hayato Yamashita

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing 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

41 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Imaging Artificial Membranes Using High-Speed Atomic Force Microscopy.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2027
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Dynamic Assembly/Disassembly ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Article
  14. Biological physics by high-speed atomic force microscopy.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2020
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

7 authors.

Toshio AndoDepartment of Physics, Kanazawa University, Kakuma-machi, Kanazawa 920-1192, Japan. tando@kenroku.kanazawa-u.ac.jp
Takayuki Uchihashi
Noriyuki Kodera
Daisuke Yamamoto
Atsushi Miyagi
Masaaki Taniguchi
Hayato Yamashita

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conventional atomic force microscopes (AFMs) take at least 30-60 s to capture an image, while dynamic biomolecular processes occur on a millisecond timescale or less. To narrow this large difference in timescale, various studies have been carried out in the past decade. These efforts have led to a maximum imaging rate of 30-60 ms/frame for a scan range of approximately 250 nm, with a weak tip-sample interaction force being maintained. Recent imaging studies using high-speed AFM with this capacity have shown that this new microscope can provide straightforward and prompt answers to how and what structural changes progress while individual biomolecules are at work. This article first compares high-speed AFM with its competitor (single-molecule fluorescence microscopy) on various aspects and then describes high-speed AFM instrumentation and imaging studies on biomolecular processes. The article concludes by discussing the future prospects of this cutting-edge microscopy.

Indexed as

Molecular BiologyAnimalsCell Physiological PhenomenaHumansMicroscopy, Atomic ForceNanotechnologyTime Factors

Identifiers

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.