Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26666984›Full record

ReviewBioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology2016

With or without rafts? Alternative views on cell membranes.

Eva Sevcsik, Gerhard J Schütz

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing 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

47 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate (PIPCommunications biology · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. The role of cholesterol in invasion and growth of malaria parasites.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

2 authors.

Eva SevcsikInstitute of Applied Physics, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria.
Gerhard J SchützInstitute of Applied Physics, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The fundamental mechanisms of protein and lipid organization at the plasma membrane have continued to engage researchers for decades. Among proposed models, one idea has been particularly successful which assumes that sterol-dependent nanoscopic phases of different lipid chain order compartmentalize proteins, thereby modulating protein functionality. This model of membrane rafts has sustainably sparked the fields of membrane biophysics and biology, and shifted membrane lipids into the spotlight of research; by now, rafts have become an integral part of our terminology to describe a variety of cell biological processes. But is the evidence clear enough to continue supporting a theoretical concept which has resisted direct proof by observation for nearly twenty years? In this essay, we revisit findings that gave rise to and substantiated the raft hypothesis, discuss its impact on recent studies, and present alternative mechanisms to account for plasma membrane heterogeneity.

Indexed as

Cell MembraneMembrane LipidsMembrane ProteinsMembrane LipidsMembrane Proteinslipidsmembrane heterogeneitymembrane proteinsmembrane raftsphase separationplasma membraneraft hypothesis

Identifiers

PMID26666984
PMCPMC6424411

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.