Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28784794›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2017

Marie-Kristin Nagel, Kamila Kalinowska, Karin Vogel, Gregory D Reynolds, Zhixiang Wu, Franziska Anzenberger, Mie Ichikawa, Chie Tsutsumi, Masa H Sato, Bernhard Kuster and 2 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

44 citing papers in PubMed, 88 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. ESCRTs in plant abiotic stresses.Essays in biochemistry · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Involvement of the Membrane Nanodomain Protein,International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. TheeLife · 2022
    Article
  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

12 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Marie-Kristin NagelChair of Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, Department of Biology, University of Konstanz, 78457 Konstanz, Germany.
Kamila KalinowskaChair of Plant Systems Biology, School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technical University of Munich, 85354 Freising, Germany.
Karin VogelChair of Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, Department of Biology, University of Konstanz, 78457 Konstanz, Germany.
Gregory D ReynoldsDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706.
Zhixiang WuChair of Proteomics and Bioanalytics, School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technical University of Munich, 85354 Freising, Germany.
Franziska AnzenbergerChair of Plant Systems Biology, School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technical University of Munich, 85354 Freising, Germany.
Mie IchikawaDepartment of Life and Environmental Sciences, Kyoto Prefectural University, 606-0823 Kyoto, Japan.
Chie TsutsumiDepartment of Botany, National Museum of Nature and Science, 305-0005 Tsukuba, Japan.
Masa H SatoDepartment of Life and Environmental Sciences, Kyoto Prefectural University, 606-0823 Kyoto, Japan.
Bernhard KusterChair of Proteomics and Bioanalytics, School of Life Sciences Weihenstephan, Technical University of Munich, 85354 Freising, Germany.
Sebastian Y BednarekDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706.
Erika IsonoChair of Plant Physiology and Biochemistry, Department of Biology, University of Konstanz, 78457 Konstanz, Germany; erika.isono@uni-konstanz.de.
Technical University of Munich · DECenter of Plant Systems Biology and Biotechnology · BGKyoto Prefectural University · JPUniversity of Konstanz · DEUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · USNational Museum of Nature and Science · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Clathrin-mediated endocytosis of plasma membrane proteins is an essential regulatory process that controls plasma membrane protein abundance and is therefore important for many signaling pathways, such as hormone signaling and biotic and abiotic stress responses. On endosomal sorting, plasma membrane proteins maybe recycled or targeted for vacuolar degradation, which is dependent on ubiquitin modification of the cargos and is driven by the endosomal sorting complexes required for transport (ESCRTs). Components of the ESCRT machinery are highly conserved among eukaryotes, but homologs of ESCRT-0 that are responsible for recognition and concentration of ubiquitylated proteins are absent in plants. Recently several ubiquitin-binding proteins have been identified that serve in place of ESCRT-0; however, their function in ubiquitin recognition and endosomal trafficking is not well understood yet. In this study, we identified Src homology-3 (SH3) domain-containing protein 2 (SH3P2) as a ubiquitin- and ESCRT-I-binding protein that functions in intracellular trafficking. SH3P2 colocalized with clathrin light chain-labeled punctate structures and interacted with clathrin heavy chain

Indexed as

ArabidopsisArabidopsis ProteinsCarrier ProteinsEndocytosisEndosomal Sorting Complexes Required for TransportEndosomesUbiquitinUbiquitinationUbiquitin-Specific ProteasesAMSH3 protein, ArabidopsisArabidopsis ProteinsCarrier ProteinsEndosomal Sorting Complexes Required for TransportSH3P2 protein, ArabidopsisUbiquitinUbiquitin-Specific ProteasesArabidopsisclathrinDUBESCRTubiquitin

Identifiers

PMID28784794
PMCPMC5576839
OpenAlexW2743082587

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.