ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2013
Regulation of hard α-keratin mechanics via control of intermediate filament hydration: matrix squeeze revisited.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Physics of animal health: on the mechano-biology of hoof growth and form.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2019Article
- Oil adsorption does not structurally or functionally alter whale baleen.Royal Society open science · 2019Article
- Hydration affects the physical and mechanical properties of baleen tissue.Royal Society open science · 2016Article
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
Mammalian hard α-keratins are fibre-reinforced biomaterials that consist of 10 nm intermediate filaments (IFs) embedded in an elastomeric protein matrix. Recent work suggests that the mechanical properties of IFs are highly sensitive to hydration, whereas hard α-keratins such as wool, hair and nail are relatively hydration insensitive. This raises the question of how mammalian keratins remain stiff in water. The matrix squeeze hypothesis states that the IFs in hard α-keratins are stiffened during an air-drying step during keratinization, and subsequently locked into a dehydrated state via the oxidation and cross-linking of the keratin matrix around them. The result is that even when hard α-keratins are immersed in water, their constituent IFs remain essentially 'dry' and therefore stiff. This hypothesis makes several predictions about the effects of matrix abundance and function on hard α-keratin mechanics and swelling behaviour. Specifically, it predicts that high matrix keratins in water will swell less, and have a higher tensile modulus, a higher yield stress and a lower dry-to-wet modulus ratio. It also predicts that disruption of the keratin matrix in water should lead to additional swelling, and a drop in modulus and yield stress. Our results are consistent with these predictions and suggest that the keratin matrix plays a critical role in governing the mechanical properties of mammalian keratins via control of IF hydration.
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.