Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20922548›Full record

ReviewProtoplasma2010

Microtubule motors and pollen tube growth--still an open question.

Giampiero Cai, Mauro Cresti

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Protoplasma, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. MicroRNA Omics Analysis ofBiomolecules · 2021
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Giampiero CaiDipartimento Scienze Ambientali G. Sarfatti, Università di Siena, via Mattioli 4, 53100 Siena, Italy. cai@unisi.it
Mauro Cresti
University of Siena · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The growth of pollen tubes is supported by the continuous supply of secretory vesicles in the tip area. Movement and accumulation of vesicles is driven by the dynamic interplay between the actin cytoskeleton and motor proteins of the myosin family. A combination of the two protein systems is also responsible for the bidirectional movement of larger organelle classes. In contrast, the role of microtubules and microtubule-based motors is less clear and often ambiguous. Nevertheless, there is evidence which shows that the pollen tube contains a number of microtubule-based motors of the kinesin family. These motor proteins are likely to be associated with pollen tube organelles and, consequently, they have been hypothesized to participate in the distribution of organelles during pollen tube growth. Whether microtubule motor proteins take part in either the transport or positioning of organelles is not known for sure, but there is evidence for this second possibility. This review will discuss the current knowledge of microtubule-based motor proteins (including kinesins and hypothetical dyneins) and will make some hypothesis about their role in the pollen tube.

Indexed as

Plant DevelopmentKinesinsMicrotubule-Associated ProteinsMicrotubulesMolecular Motor ProteinsOrganellesPlantsPollen TubeKinesinsMicrotubule-Associated ProteinsMolecular Motor Proteins

Identifiers

PMID20922548
OpenAlexW2044038678

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.