ArticleBiophysical journal2010
Fluctuations and the rate-limiting step of peptide-induced membrane leakage.
Article in Biophysical journal, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Membrane Topology and Oligomerization of Peptaibols by Solid-State NMR Spectroscopy.Journal of peptide science : an official publication of the European Peptide Society · 2026Review
- Leaky membrane fusion: an ambivalent effect induced by antimicrobial polycations.Nanoscale advances · 2022Article
- The cyclic peptide labaditin does not alter the outer membrane integrity of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Exchange of Gramicidin between Lipid Bilayers: Implications for the Mechanism of Channel Formation.Biophysical journal · 2017Article
- Selective Membrane Disruption Mechanism of an Antibacterial γ-AApeptide Defined by EPR Spectroscopy.Biophysical journal · 2016Article
- Article
- Article
- Fluorescence spectroscopy and molecular dynamics simulations in studies on the mechanism of membrane destabilization by antimicrobial peptides.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2011Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Peptide-induced vesicle leakage is a common experimental test for the membrane-perturbing activity of antimicrobial peptides. The leakage kinetics is usually very slow, requiring minutes to hours for complete release of vesicle contents, and exhibits a biphasic behavior. We report here that, in the case of the peptaibol trichogin GA IV, all processes involved in peptide-membrane interaction, such as peptide-membrane association, peptide aggregation, and peptide translocation, take place on a timescale much shorter than the leakage kinetics. On the basis of these findings, we propose a stochastic model in which the leakage kinetics is determined by the discrete nature of a vesicle suspension: peptides are continuously exchanging among vesicles, producing significant fluctuations over time in the number of peptide molecules bound to each vesicle, and in the formation of pores. According to this model, the fast initial leakage is caused by vesicles that contain at least one pore after the peptides are randomly distributed among the liposomes, whereas the slower release is associated with the time needed to occasionally reach in an intact vesicle the critical number of bound peptides necessary for pore formation. Fluctuations due to peptide exchange among vesicles therefore represent the rate-limiting step of such a slow mechanism.
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.