ReviewCell adhesion & migration2016
Toward the reconstitution of synthetic cell motility.
Review in Cell adhesion & migration, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reconstituted systems for studying the architecture and dynamics of actin networks.The Biochemical journal · 2025Review
- Haptotactic Motion of Multivalent Vesicles Along Ligand-Density Gradients.Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids · 2025Article
- Metareview: a survey of active matter reviews.The European physical journal. E, Soft matter · 2025Review
- Fabrication of microcompartments with controlled size and shape for encapsulating active matter.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Article
- How cytoskeletal crosstalk makes cells move: Bridging cell-free and cell studies.Biophysics reviews · 2024Review
- Building Synthetic Cells─From the Technology Infrastructure to Cellular Entities.ACS synthetic biology · 2024Review
- Bottom-Up Synthetic Biology Using Cell-Free Protein Synthesis.Advances in biochemical engineering/biotechnology · 2023Review
- Synthetic cells in biomedical applications.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Nanomedicine and nanobiotechnology · 2022Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cellular motility is a fundamental process essential for embryonic development, wound healing, immune responses, and tissues development. Cells are mostly moving by crawling on external, or inside, substrates which can differ in their surface composition, geometry, and dimensionality. Cells can adopt different migration phenotypes, e.g., bleb-based and protrusion-based, depending on myosin contractility, surface adhesion, and cell confinement. In the few past decades, research on cell motility has focused on uncovering the major molecular players and their order of events. Despite major progresses, our ability to infer on the collective behavior from the molecular properties remains a major challenge, especially because cell migration integrates numerous chemical and mechanical processes that are coupled via feedbacks that span over large range of time and length scales. For this reason, reconstituted model systems were developed. These systems allow for full control of the molecular constituents and various system parameters, thereby providing insight into their individual roles and functions. In this review we describe the various reconstituted model systems that were developed in the past decades. Because of the multiple steps involved in cell motility and the complexity of the overall process, most of the model systems focus on very specific aspects of the individual steps of cell motility. Here we describe the main advancement in cell motility reconstitution and discuss the main challenges toward the realization of a synthetic motile cell.
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.