Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24062577›Full record

ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2013

From simple to detailed models for cell polarization.

Leah Edelstein-Keshet, William R Holmes, Mark Zajac, Meghan Dutot

Abstract readComparative StudyReview
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing 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

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Sensing the shape of a cell with reaction diffusion and energy minimization.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Mass conservative reaction-diffusion systems describing cell polarity.Mathematical methods in the applied sciences · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

4 authors.

Leah Edelstein-KeshetDepartment of Mathematics, University of British Columbia, , Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada , V6T 1Z2.
William R Holmes
Mark Zajac
Meghan Dutot

Funding

Control of Actin Assembly and Cell Migration by Actin-Regulating ProteinsR01GM086882 · NIGMS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI CARLSSON, ANDERS E · 2008 to 2011
$1.0M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM086882
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many mathematical models have been proposed for the process of cell polarization. Some of these are 'functional models' that capture a class of dynamical behaviour, whereas others are derived from features of signalling molecules. Some mechanistic models are detailed, and therefore complex, whereas others are simplified. Each type contributes to our understanding of cell polarization. However, the huge variety at different levels of detail makes comparisons challenging. Here, we provide examples of both elementary and more detailed models for polarization. We also display how a recent mathematical method, local perturbation analysis, can provide an appropriate tool for such comparisons. This technique simplifies and speeds up the model development process by revealing the effect of model extensions, parameter variations and in silico manipulations such as knock-out or over-expression of key molecules. Finally, simulations in both one dimension and two dimensions, and particularly in deforming two-dimensional 'cells', can highlight behaviour not captured by traditional simulation methods.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalCell PolarityCell ShapeComputer SimulationMonomeric GTP-Binding ProteinsMonomeric GTP-Binding Proteinscell polarizationmathematical analysispattern formationreaction–diffusion equations

Identifiers

PMID24062577
PMCPMC3785957

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.