ArticleScientific reports2016
A model for cyclic mechanical reinforcement.
Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Energetic Landscape of Catch Bonds in TCR Interfaces.Journal of immunology (Baltimore, Md. : 1950) · 2023Review
- Receptor-Ligand Binding: Effect of Mechanical Factors.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Physical-Chemical Regulation of Membrane Receptors Dynamics in Viral Invasion and Immune Defense.Journal of molecular biology · 2023Review
- The bioenergetics of integrin-based adhesion, from single molecule dynamics to stability of macromolecular complexes.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2020Review
- Dynamics of Mechanosensitive Nascent Adhesion Formation.Biophysical journal · 2019Article
- Biophysical nanotools for single-molecule dynamics.Biophysical reviews · 2018Review
- Receptor-mediated cell mechanosensing.Molecular biology of the cell · 2017Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
Mechanical force regulates a broad range of molecular interactions in biology. Three types of counterintuitive mechanical regulation of receptor-ligand dissociation have been described. Catch bonds are strengthened by constant forces, as opposed to slip bonds that are weakened by constant forces. The phenomenon that bonds become stronger with prior application of cyclic forces is termed cyclic mechanical reinforcement (CMR). Slip and catch bonds have respectively been explained by two-state models. However, they assume fast equilibration between internal states and hence are inadequate for CMR. Here we propose a three-state model for CMR where both loading and unloading regulate the transition of bonds among the short-lived, intermediate, and long-lived state. Cyclic forces favor bonds in the long-lived state, hence greatly prolonging their lifetimes. The three-state model explains the force history effect and agrees with the experimental CMR effect of integrin α
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.