ReviewBiophysical reviews2018
An historical perspective of the discovery of titin filaments -Part 2.
Review in Biophysical reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Research exchange with Cris: from fluorescence spectroscopy to human myocardium.Biophysical reviews · 2020Article
- A note of appreciation for Prof. Cristobal dos Remedios on behalf of Biophysical Reviews.Biophysical reviews · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In 2017, a Special Issue of Biophysical Reviews was devoted to "Titin and Its Binding Partners. The issue contained a review: "An historical perspective of the discovery of titin filaments" by dos Remedios and Gilmour that was intended to be a history of the discovery of the giant protein titin, previously named connectin. The review took readers back to the earliest discovery of the so-called third filament component of skeletal and cardiac muscle sarcomeres and ended in 1969. Recently, my colleague Shin'ichi Ishiwata gently reminded me of two papers published in 1990 and 1993 that were unwittingly omitted from the original historical perspective. In the first paper (J Cell Biol 110:53-62, 1990), Funatsu et al. examined the elastic filaments in skeletal muscle using a combination of light and electron microscopy, but they also measured resting as well as passive stiffness mechanical measurements to establish that connectin (titin) is responsible for both stiffness and fiber tension. In the second paper (J Cell Biol 120:711-724, 1993), Funatsu et al. used permeabilised cardiac muscle myocytes (from rabbit papillary muscles) and focussed on filament ultrastructure using either freeze-substitution or deep-etched replica methods to visualise connectin/titin filaments in fibers with and without actin and myosin filaments.
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.