Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30323238›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Molecular cell biology2019

Actin-microtubule crosstalk in cell biology.

Marileen Dogterom, Gijsje H Koenderink

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 290 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
290citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
26.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

290 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 588 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

230 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Marileen DogteromDepartment of Bionanoscience, Kavli Institute of Nanoscience, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands. m.dogterom@tudelft.nl.
Gijsje H KoenderinkAMOLF, Living Matter Department, Amsterdam, Netherlands. g.koenderink@amolf.nl.
Delft University of Technology · NLInstitute for Atomic and Molecular Physics · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The cytoskeleton and its components - actin, microtubules and intermediate filaments - have been studied for decades, and multiple roles of the individual cytoskeletal substructures are now well established. However, in recent years it has become apparent that the three cytoskeletal elements also engage in extensive crosstalk that is important for core biological processes. Actin-microtubule crosstalk is particularly important for the regulation of cell shape and polarity during cell migration and division and the establishment of neuronal and epithelial cell shape and function. This crosstalk engages different cytoskeletal regulators and encompasses various physical interactions, such as crosslinking, anchoring and mechanical support. Thus, the cytoskeleton should be considered not as a collection of individual parts but rather as a unified system in which subcomponents co-regulate each other to exert their functions in a precise and highly adaptable manner.

Indexed as

ActinsAnimalsCell ShapeCytoskeletonEpithelial CellsHumansMicrotubulesActins

Identifiers

PMID30323238
OpenAlexW2896737648

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.