Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27182438›Full record

ArticleMethods and applications in fluorescence2015

Model-free methods to study membrane environmental probes: a comparison of the spectral phasor and generalized polarization approaches.

Leonel Malacrida, Enrico Gratton, David M Jameson

Erratum issuedOpen access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Methods and applications in fluorescence, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Leonel MalacridaÁrea de Investigación Respiratoria, Departamento de Fisiopatología, Hospital de Medicina-Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de la República, Montevideo, Uruguay; Biochemistry and Proteomic Analytical Unit, Institut Pasteur of Montevideo, Montevideo, Uruguay.
Enrico GrattonLaboratory for Fluorescence Dynamics, Biomedical Engineering Department, University of California at Irvine, Irvine, CA 92697, USA.
David M JamesonDepartment of Cell and Molecular Biology, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 651 Halo St., BSB222, Honolulu, HI 96813, USA.
Institut Pasteur de Montevideo · UYUniversity of California, Irvine · USUniversity of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa · US

Funding

Uncover Strategies Used By Biological SystemsP50GM076516 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI LANDER, ARTHUR D · 2007 to 2016
$25.1M
TRD4: Phasor analysisP41GM103540 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI GRATTON, ENRICO · 2012 to 2020
$12.5M
NIGMS NIH HHS P41 GM103540NIGMS NIH HHS P50 GM076516
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this note, we present a discussion of the advantages and scope of model-free analysis methods applied to the popular solvatochromic probe LAURDAN, which is widely used as an environmental probe to study dynamics and structure in membranes. In particular, we compare and contrast the generalized polarization approach with the spectral phasor approach. To illustrate our points we utilize several model membrane systems containing pure lipid phases and, in some cases, cholesterol or surfactants. We demonstrate that the spectral phasor method offers definitive advantages in the case of complex systems.

Indexed as

generalized polarizationLAURDANlung surfactantmembrane biophysicsspectral phasor

Identifiers

PMID27182438
PMCPMC4862737
OpenAlexW2380119876

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.