Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24411242›Full record

ArticleBiophysical journal2014

Evidence for two extremes of ciliary motor response in a single swimming microorganism.

Ilyong Jung, Thomas R Powers, James M Valles

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biophysical journal, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Walking is like slithering: A unifying, data-driven view of locomotion.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Polarity in Ciliate Models: From Cilia to Cell Architecture.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2019
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ilyong JungDepartment of Physics, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
Thomas R PowersDepartment of Physics, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island; School of Engineering, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island.
James M VallesDepartment of Physics, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. Electronic address: james_valles_jr@brown.edu.
Brown University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Because arrays of motile cilia drive fluids for a range of processes, the versatile mechano-chemical mechanism coordinating them has been under scrutiny. The protist Paramecium presents opportunities to compare how groups of cilia perform two distinct functions, swimming propulsion and nutrient uptake. We present how the body cilia responsible for propulsion and the oral-groove cilia responsible for nutrient uptake respond to changes in their mechanical environment accomplished by varying the fluid viscosity over a factor of 7. Analysis with a phenomenological model of trajectories of swimmers made neutrally buoyant with magnetic forces combined with high-speed imaging of ciliary beating reveal that the body cilia exert a nearly constant propulsive force primarily by reducing their beat frequency as viscosity increases. By contrast, the oral-groove cilia beat at a nearly constant frequency. The existence of two extremes of motor response in a unicellular organism prompts unique investigations of factors controlling ciliary beating.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalCiliaMagnetic FieldsMovementParamecium caudatumViscosity

Identifiers

PMID24411242
PMCPMC3907369
OpenAlexW2044559810

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.