ArticleThe Journal of membrane biology2015
Comparative mechanisms of protein transduction mediated by cell-penetrating peptides in prokaryotes.
Article in The Journal of membrane biology, 2015. 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, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cell-Penetrating Peptides for Use in Development of Transgenic Plants.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Antimicrobial and Cell-Penetrating Peptides: Understanding Penetration for the Design of Novel Conjugate Antibiotics.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Effect of Size and Concentration of Copper Nanoparticles on the Antimicrobial Activity inNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- FISH-TAMB, a Fixation-Free mRNA Fluorescent Labeling Technique to Target Transcriptionally Active Members in Microbial Communities.Microbial ecology · 2022Article
- Bio-Membrane Internalization Mechanisms of Arginine-Rich Cell-Penetrating Peptides in Various Species.Membranes · 2022Article
- Anti-Biofilm Effects of Synthetic Antimicrobial Peptides Against Drug-ResistantMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
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
Bacterial and archaeal cell envelopes are complex multilayered barriers that serve to protect these microorganisms from their extremely harsh and often hostile environments. Import of exogenous proteins and nanoparticles into cells is important for biotechnological applications in prokaryotes. In this report, we demonstrate that cell-penetrating peptides (CPPs), both bacteria-expressed nona-arginine peptide (R9) and synthetic R9 (SR9), are able to deliver noncovalently associated proteins or quantum dots into four representative species of prokaryotes: cyanobacteria (Synechocystis sp. PCC 6803), bacteria (Escherichia coli DH5α and Arthrobacter ilicis D-50), and archaea (Thermus aquaticus). Although energy-dependent endocytosis is generally accepted as a hallmark that distinguishes eukaryotes from prokaryotes, cellular uptake of uncomplexed green fluorescent protein (GFP) by cyanobacteria was mediated by classical endocytosis. Mechanistic studies revealed that macropinocytosis plays a critical and major role in CPP-mediated protein transduction in all four prokaryotes. Membrane damage was not observed when cyanobacterial cells were treated with R9/GFP complexes, nor was cytotoxicity detected when bacteria or archaea were treated with SR9/QD complexes in the presence of macropinocytic inhibitors. These results indicate that the uptake of protein is not due to a compromise of membrane integrity in cyanobacteria, and that CPP can be an effective and safe carrier for membrane trafficking in prokaryotic cells. Our investigation provides important new insights into the transport of exogenous proteins and nanoparticles across the complex membrane systems of prokaryotes.
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.