Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24659994›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in plant science2014

Dissecting the molecular mechanism underlying the intimate relationship between cellulose microfibrils and cortical microtubules.

Lei Lei, Shundai Li, Logan Bashline, Ying Gu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Protein Phosphatase 2Cs andThe Plant cell · 2017
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Plasmolysis: Loss of Turgor and Beyond.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2014
    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.

Lei LeiDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park PA, USA.
Shundai LiDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park PA, USA.
Logan BashlineDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park PA, USA.
Ying GuDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park PA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A central question in plant cell development is how the cell wall determines directional cell expansion and therefore the final shape of the cell. As the major load-bearing component of the cell wall, cellulose microfibrils are laid down transversely to the axis of elongation, thus forming a spring-like structure that reinforces the cell laterally and while favoring longitudinal expansion in most growing cells. Mounting evidence suggests that cortical microtubules organize the deposition of cellulose microfibrils, but the precise molecular mechanisms linking microtubules to cellulose organization have remained unclear until the recent discovery of cellulose synthase interactive protein 1 , a linker protein between the cortical microtubules and the cellulose biosynthesizing machinery. In this review, we will focus on the intimate relationship between cellulose microfibrils and cortical microtubules, in particular, we will discuss microtubule arrangement and cell wall architecture, the linkage between cellulose synthase complexes and microtubules, and the feedback mechanisms between cell wall and microtubules.

Indexed as

cell expansioncellulose synthase complexcell wallCESA interactive proteinsmicrotubules

Identifiers

PMID24659994
PMCPMC3952479

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.