ArticleProtoplasma2008
Cytoplasmic compartmental response to local mechanical stimulation of internal tissue cells.
Article in Protoplasma, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nuclei in motion: movement and positioning of plant nuclei in development, signaling, symbiosis, and disease.Frontiers in plant science · 2014Review
- The nucleus as a chief cellular organizer and active defender in response to mechanical stimulation.Plant signaling & behavior · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A convenient experimental system was established to test how cells derived from higher-plant internal tissues respond to mechanical stimulation. Short-term culture of tobacco ovules in vitro led to the generation of bar-shaped cells from the parenchyma tissue of the ovule funicle. These cells are still connected to the mother tissue and are almost undifferentiated. The cells are translucent, and one end protrudes from the funicle, making them easy to manipulate and observe. Mechanical stimulation tests performed on these cells indicated that the cells are less sensitive to mechanical stimulation than epidermal hair cells but still possess the ability to respond to stimulation. Interestingly, the cells showed a cytoplasmic compartmental response to the stimulation. The nucleus, some plastids, and mitochondria were organized into a responsive unit that moved in unison to the stimulated sites, whereas most of the other organelles were not notably influenced by the stimulation. This suggests that the cytoplasm is highly organized and functionally divided in response to environmental stimulation.
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.