Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23271831›Full record

ReviewOpen biology2012

Exotic mitotic mechanisms.

Hauke Drechsler, Andrew D McAinsh

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Open biology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing 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

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Evolutionary cell biology comes of age.Journal of cell science · 2025
    Article
  3. Mitotic spindle membranes.Molecular biology of the cell · 2025
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Real-time dynamics ofJournal of cell science · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Mosaic origin of the eukaryotic kinetochore.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Hauke DrechslerCentre for Mechanochemical Cell Biology, Division of Biomedical Cell Biology, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK.
Andrew D McAinsh

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/I021353/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The emergence of eukaryotes around two billion years ago provided new challenges for the chromosome segregation machineries: the physical separation of multiple large and linear chromosomes from the microtubule-organizing centres by the nuclear envelope. In this review, we set out the diverse solutions that eukaryotic cells use to solve this problem, and show how stepping away from 'mainstream' mitosis can teach us much about the mechanisms and mechanics that can drive chromosome segregation. We discuss the evidence for a close functional and physical relationship between membranes, nuclear pores and kinetochores in generating the forces necessary for chromosome segregation during mitosis.

Indexed as

AnimalsBacteriaChromosome SegregationEukaryotic CellsHumansKinetochoresMicrotubule-Organizing CenterMicrotubulesMitosisNuclear EnvelopeNuclear PoreNuclear Pore Complex ProteinsSpindle ApparatusNuclear Pore Complex Proteins

Identifiers

PMID23271831
PMCPMC3603444

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.