Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19255823›Full record

ArticleProtoplasma2009

Mitosis: spindle evolution and the matrix model.

Jeremy Pickett-Heaps, Art Forer

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Protoplasma, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Evidence of Non-microtubule Spindle Forces inFrontiers in molecular biosciences · 2020
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Do nuclear envelope and intranuclear proteins reorganize during mitosis to form an elastic, hydrogel-like spindle matrix?Chromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology · 2011
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jeremy Pickett-HeapsSchool of Botany, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, 3052, Australia. jeremyph@unimelb.edu.au
Art Forer
University of Melbourne · AUYork University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current spindle models explain "anaphase A" (movement of chromosomes to the poles) in terms of a motility system based solely on microtubules (MTs) and that functions in a manner unique to mitosis. We find both these propositions unlikely. An evolutionary perspective suggests that when the spindle evolved, it should have come to share not only components (e.g., microtubules) of the interphase cell but also the primitive motility systems available, including those using actin and myosin. Other systems also came to be involved in the additional types of motility that now accompany mitosis in extant spindles. The resultant functional redundancy built reliability into this critical and complex process. Such multiple mechanisms are also confusing to those who seek to understand how chromosomes move. Narrowing this commentary down to just anaphase A, we argue that the spindle matrix participates with MTs in anaphase A and that this matrix may contain actin and myosin. The diatom spindle illustrates how such a system could function. This matrix may be motile and work in association with the MT cytoskeleton, as it does with the actin cytoskeleton during cell ruffling and amoeboid movement. Instead of pulling the chromosome polewards, the kinetochore fibre's role might be to slow polewards movement to allow correct chromosome attachment to the spindle. Perhaps the earliest eukaryotic cell was a cytoplast organised around a radial MT cytoskeleton. For cell division, it separated into two cytoplasts via a spindle of overlapping MTs. Cytokinesis was actin-based cleavage. As chromosomes evolved into individual entities, their interaction with the dividing cytoplast developed into attachment of the kinetochore to radial (cytoplast) MTs. We believe it most likely that cytoplasmic motility systems participated in these events.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionActinsAnaphaseDiatomsKinetochoresMicroscopy, Electron, TransmissionMicrotubulesMitosisModels, BiologicalMyosinsSpindle ApparatusActinsMyosins

Identifiers

PMID19255823
OpenAlexW2084682120

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.