ArticleThe Journal of physiology2013
Osmotic water transport in aquaporins: evidence for a stochastic mechanism.
Article in The Journal of physiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Aquaporin membrane channels in the hepatobiliary tract: a model of complexity and clinical implications in health and disease.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Review
- Stress-dependent growth in breast cancer arises from a mechano-osmotic coupling and cell-sizing checkpoint.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- A budget for brain metabolic water production by glucose catabolism during rest, rises in activity and sleep.Fluids and barriers of the CNS · 2025Review
- Aquaporins in Biliary Function: Pathophysiological Implications and Therapeutic Targeting.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Plant and animal aquaporins crosstalk: what can be revealed from distinct perspectives.Biophysical reviews · 2017Review
- Aquaporin water channels in the mammary gland: from physiology to pathophysiology and neoplasia.Journal of mammary gland biology and neoplasia · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Abstract We test a novel, stochastic model of osmotic water transport in aquaporins. A solute molecule present at the pore mouth can either be reflected or permeate the pore. We assume that only reflected solute molecules induce osmotic transport of water through the pore, while permeating solute molecules give rise to no water transport. Accordingly, the rate of water transport is proportional to the reflection coefficient σ, while the solute permeability, P(S), is proportional to 1 - σ. The model was tested in aquaporins heterologously expressed in Xenopus oocytes. A variety of aquaporin channel sizes and geometries were obtained with the two aquaporins AQP1 and AQP9 and mutant versions of these. Osmotic water transport was generated by adding 20 mM of a range of different-sized osmolytes to the outer solution. The osmotic water permeability and the reflection coefficient were measured optically at high resolution and compared to the solute permeability obtained from short-term uptake of radio-labelled solute under isotonic conditions. For each type of aquaporin there was a linear relationship between solute permeability and reflection coefficient, in accordance with the model. We found no evidence for coupling between water and solute fluxes in the pore. In confirmation of molecular dynamic simulations, we conclude that the magnitude of the osmotic water permeability and the reflection coefficient are determined by processes at the arginine selectivity filter located at the outward-facing end of the pore.
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.