Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29034086›Full record

ReviewF1000Research2017

How do you recognize and reconstitute a synaptic vesicle after fusion?

Natali L Chanaday, Ege T Kavalali

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in F1000Research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. VAMP4 Maintains a CaThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
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

2 authors.

Natali L ChanadayDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Centre, Dallas, TX, 75390-9111, USA.
Ege T KavalaliDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Centre, Dallas, TX, 75390-9111, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1777-227X

Funding

Role of SNARE Interactions in Central Synapse FunctionR01MH066198 · NIMH · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI KAVALALI, EGE T · 2004 to 2023
$7.9M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH066198
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Synaptic vesicle recycling is essential for sustained and reliable neurotransmission. A key component of synaptic vesicle recycling is the synaptic vesicle biogenesis process that is observed in synapses and that maintains the molecular identity of synaptic vesicles. However, the mechanisms by which synaptic vesicles are retrieved and reconstituted after fusion remain unclear. The complex molecular composition of synaptic vesicles renders their rapid biogenesis a daunting task. Therefore, in this context, kiss-and-run type transient fusion of synaptic vesicles with the plasma membrane without loss of their membrane composition and molecular identity remains a viable hypothesis that can account for the fidelity of the synaptic vesicle cycle. In this article, we discuss the biological implications of this problem as well as its possible molecular solutions.

Indexed as

kiss-and-run endocytosisneurotransmissionsynaptic vesicletransient fusion

Identifiers

PMID29034086
PMCPMC5615776

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.