ArticleBMC biology2015
Accurate chromosome segregation by probabilistic self-organisation.
Article in BMC 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multiscale Architecture and Mechanics of the Cell Nucleus: Implications for Disease, Bioengineering and Nanomedicine.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Interrelated effects of chromosome size, mechanics, number, location-orientation and polar ejection force on the spindle accuracy: a 3D computational study.Molecular biology of the cell · 2023Article
- Drugging Hijacked Kinase Pathways in Pediatric Oncology: Opportunities and Current Scenario.Pharmaceutics · 2023Review
- MASTL: A novel therapeutic target for Cancer Malignancy.Cancer medicine · 2020Review
- G2/M inhibitors as pharmacotherapeutic opportunities for glioblastoma: the old, the new, and the future.Cancer biology & medicine · 2018Article
- Aurora-A Kinase as a Promising Therapeutic Target in Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFor faithful chromosome segregation during cell division, correct attachments must be established between sister chromosomes and microtubules from opposite spindle poles through kinetochores (chromosome bi-orientation). Incorrect attachments of kinetochore microtubules (kMTs) lead to chromosome mis-segregation and aneuploidy, which is often associated with developmental abnormalities such as Down syndrome and diseases including cancer. The interaction between kinetochores and microtubules is highly dynamic with frequent attachments and detachments. However, it remains unclear how chromosome bi-orientation is achieved with such accuracy in such a dynamic process.
resultsTo gain new insight into this essential process, we have developed a simple mathematical model of kinetochore-microtubule interactions during cell division in general, i.e. both mitosis and meiosis. Firstly, the model reveals that the balance between attachment and detachment probabilities of kMTs is crucial for correct chromosome bi-orientation. With the right balance, incorrect attachments are resolved spontaneously into correct bi-oriented conformations while an imbalance leads to persistent errors. In addition, the model explains why errors are more commonly found in the first meiotic division (meiosis I) than in mitosis and how a faulty conformation can evade the spindle assembly checkpoint, which may lead to a chromosome loss.
conclusionsThe proposed model, despite its simplicity, helps us understand one of the primary causes of chromosomal instability-aberrant kinetochore-microtubule interactions. The model reveals that chromosome bi-orientation is a probabilistic self-organisation, rather than a sophisticated process of error detection and correction.
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.