ArticlePloS one2013
How do amoebae swim and crawl?
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cell deformations generated by stochastic actomyosin waves drive in vivo random-walk swimming migration.Journal of cell science · 2025Article
- Trackoscope: A low-cost, open, autonomous tracking microscope for long-term observations of microscale organisms.PloS one · 2024Article
- Macropinocytosis-mediated membrane recycling drives neural crest migration by delivering F-actin to the lamellipodium.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020Article
- Amoeboid Swimming Is Propelled by Molecular Paddling in Lymphocytes.Biophysical journal · 2020Article
- Review
- Cellular locomotion using environmental topography.Nature · 2020Article
- Getting in shape and swimming: the role of cortical forces and membrane heterogeneity in eukaryotic cells.Journal of mathematical biology · 2018Article
- Surface attachment, promoted by the actomyosin system of Toxoplasma gondii is important for efficient gliding motility and invasion.BMC biology · 2017Article
- Eukaryotic Cell Dynamics from Crawlers to Swimmers.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Computational molecular scienceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The surface behaviour of swimming amoebae was followed in cells bearing a cAR1-paGFP (cyclic AMP receptor fused to a photoactivatable-GFP) construct. Sensitized amoebae were placed in a buoyant medium where they could swim toward a chemoattractant cAMP source. paGFP, activated at the cell's front, remained fairly stationary in the cell's frame as the cell advanced; the label was not swept rearwards. Similar experiments with chemotaxing cells attached to a substratum gave the same result. Furthermore, if the region around a lateral projection near a crawling cell's front is marked, the projection and the labelled cAR1 behave differently. The label spreads by diffusion but otherwise remains stationary in the cell's frame; the lateral projection moves rearwards on the cell (remaining stationary with respect to the substrate), so that it ends up outside the labelled region. Furthermore, as cAR1-GFP cells move, they occasionally do so in a remarkably straight line; this suggests they do not need to snake to move on a substratum. Previously, we suggested that the surface membrane of a moving amoeba flows from front to rear as part of a polarised membrane trafficking cycle. This could explain how swimming amoebae are able to exert a force against the medium. Our present results indicate that, in amoebae, the suggested surface flow does not exist: this implies that they swim by shape changes.
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.