Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28171751›Full record

ArticleCurrent biology : CB2017

Response to Zambon et al.

Caroline Laplante, Thomas D Pollard

Open access · bronzeAbstract readLetterComment
In one paragraph

Article in Current biology : CB, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 38% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Caroline LaplanteDepartment of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, USA.
Thomas D PollardDepartment of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, USA; Department of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, USA; Department of Cell Biology, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, USA. Electronic address: thomas.pollard@yale.edu.
Yale University · US

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Mechanism of cytokinesis in fission yeastR01GM026132 · NIGMS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI POLLARD, THOMAS D. · 1985 to 2021
$8.8M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM026132
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stimulated by our 2015 Current Biology paper [1], Zambon et al. reinvestigated how three myosin isoforms participate in the formation and constriction of the contractile ring in fission yeast. Our paper presented evidence that these myosin isoforms have distinct roles: "Conventional myosin-II Myo2 is crucial to ring assembly, unconventional myosin-II Myp2 is most important for ring constriction, and type V myosin Myo51 aids the other two myosins." Zambon et al. used different markers to reexamine the contributions of the three myosins to cytokinesis and concluded "that Myo2p is the major motor involved in ring contraction in S. pombe." Here, we show that most of the differences observed by Zambon et al. can be attributed to their use of the Rlc1p-3GFP marker, which genetically interacts with myo2-E1.

Indexed as

SchizosaccharomycesSchizosaccharomyces pombe ProteinsConstrictionMyosin Heavy ChainsMyosinsMyosin Type IIMYO2 protein, S pombeMyo51 protein, S pombeMyosin Heavy ChainsMyosinsMyosin Type IIMyp2 protein, S pombeSchizosaccharomyces pombe Proteins

Identifiers

PMID28171751
PMCPMC5310765
OpenAlexW2587237741

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.