Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20858428›Full record

ArticleBiophysical journal2010

Kinesin recycling in stationary membrane tubes.

Paige M Shaklee, Timon Idema, Line Bourel-Bonnet, Marileen Dogterom, Thomas Schmidt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biophysical journal, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

5 authors.

Paige M ShakleePhysics of Life Processes, Leiden Institute of Physics, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Timon Idema
Line Bourel-Bonnet
Marileen Dogterom
Thomas Schmidt

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Collections of motors dynamically organize to extract membrane tubes. These tubes grow but often pause or change direction as they traverse an underlying microtubule (MT) network. In vitro, membrane tubes also stall: they stop growing in length despite a large group of motors available at the tip to pull them forward. In these stationary membrane tubes in vitro, we find that clusters of processive kinesin motors form and reach the tip of the tube at regular time intervals. The average times between cluster arrivals depends on the time over which motors depart from the tip, suggesting that motors are recycled toward the tip. Numerical simulations of the motor dynamics in the membrane tube and on the MTs show that the presence of cooperative binding between motors quantitatively accounts for the clustering observed experimentally. Cooperative binding along the length of the MT and a nucleation point at a distance behind the tip define the recycling period. Based on comparison of the numerical results and experimental data, we estimate a cooperative binding probability and concentration regime where the recycling phenomenon occurs.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell MembraneDrosophila melanogasterInsect ProteinsKinesinsMicrotubulesReproducibility of ResultsTime FactorsInsect ProteinsKinesins

Identifiers

PMID20858428
PMCPMC2940996

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.