ArticleBiophysical journal2017
Putting the Piezolyte Hypothesis under Pressure.
Article in Biophysical journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Extremophilic microbial metabolism and radioactive waste disposal.Extremophiles : life under extreme conditions · 2023Review
- The ability of trimethylamine N-oxide to resist pressure induced perturbations to water structure.Communications chemistry · 2022Article
- Microbiomes in the Challenger Deep slope and bottom-axis sediments.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Histocompatibility and Reproduction: Lessons from the Anglerfish.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A group of small molecules that stabilize proteins against high hydrostatic pressure has been classified as piezolytes, a subset of stabilizing cosolutes. This distinction would imply that piezolytes counteract the effects of high hydrostatic pressure through effects on the volumetric properties of the protein. The purpose of this study was to determine if cosolutes proposed to be piezolytes have an effect on the volumetric properties of proteins through direct experimental measurements of volume changes upon unfolding of model proteins lysozyme and ribonuclease A, in solutions containing varying cosolute concentrations. Solutions containing the proposed piezolytes glutamate, sarcosine, and betaine were used, as well as solutions containing the denaturants guanidinium hydrochloride and urea. Changes in thermostability were monitored using differential scanning calorimetry whereas changes in volume were monitored using pressure perturbation calorimetry. Our findings indicate that increasing stabilizing cosolute concentration increases the stability and transition temperature of the protein, but does not change the temperature dependence of volume changes upon unfolding. The results suggest that the pressure stability of a protein in solution is not directly affected by the presence of these proposed piezolytes, and so they cannot be granted this distinction.
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.