Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26236824›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2015

A dimensionless ordered pull-through model of the mammalian lens epithelium evidences scaling across species and explains the age-dependent changes in cell density in the human lens.

Jun Jie Wu, Weiju Wu, Frederique M Tholozan, Christopher D Saunter, John M Girkin, Roy A Quinlan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The lens growth process.Progress in retinal and eye research · 2017
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. A full lifespan model of vertebrate lens growth.Royal Society open science · 2017
    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

6 authors.

Jun Jie Wu
Weiju Wu
Frederique M Tholozan
Christopher D Saunter
John M Girkin
Roy A Quinlan

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We present a mathematical (ordered pull-through; OPT) model of the cell-density profile for the mammalian lens epithelium together with new experimental data. The model is based upon dimensionless parameters, an important criterion for inter-species comparisons where lens sizes can vary greatly (e.g. bovine (approx. 18 mm); mouse (approx. 2 mm)) and confirms that mammalian lenses scale with size. The validated model includes two parameters: β/α, which is the ratio of the proliferation rate in the peripheral and in the central region of the lens; and γ(GZ), a dimensionless pull-through parameter that accounts for the cell transition and exit from the epithelium into the lens body. Best-fit values were determined for mouse, rat, rabbit, bovine and human lens epithelia. The OPT model accounts for the peak in cell density at the periphery of the lens epithelium, a region where cell proliferation is concentrated and reaches a maximum coincident with the germinative zone. The β/α ratio correlates with the measured FGF-2 gradient, a morphogen critical to lens cell survival, proliferation and differentiation. As proliferation declines with age, the OPT model predicted age-dependent changes in cell-density profiles, which we observed in mouse and human lenses.

Indexed as

Cell DifferentiationCell ProliferationModels, BiologicalAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAgingAnimalsCattleCell SurvivalEpitheliumFemaleHumansLens, CrystallineMaleMice

Identifiers

PMID26236824
PMCPMC4528606

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.