Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31244875›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in plant science2019

Feeling Stressed or Strained? A Biophysical Model for Cell Wall Mechanosensing in Plants.

Antoine Fruleux, Stéphane Verger, Arezki Boudaoud

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Differential prolyl hydroxylation by six Physcomitrella prolyl-4 hydroxylases.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Structure and growth of plant cell walls.Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology · 2024
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Mechanosensing, from forces to structures.Frontiers in plant science · 2022
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Wood and the Activity of Dead Tissue.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2021
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Antoine FruleuxLaboratoire de Reproduction et Développement des Plantes, Université de Lyon, ENS de Lyon, UCBL, INRA, CNRS, Lyon, France.
Stéphane VergerDepartment of Forest Genetics and Plant Physiology, Umeå Plant Science Centre, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå, Sweden.
Arezki BoudaoudLaboratoire de Reproduction et Développement des Plantes, Université de Lyon, ENS de Lyon, UCBL, INRA, CNRS, Lyon, France.
École Normale Supérieure de Lyon · FRLaboratoire Reproduction et Développement des Plantes · FRUmeå Plant Science Centre · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mechanical signals have recently emerged as a major cue in plant morphogenesis, notably influencing cytoskeleton organization, gene expression, protein polarity, or cell division. Although many putative mechanosensing proteins have been identified, it is unclear what mechanical cue they might sense and how this would occur. Here we briefly explain the notions of mechanical stress and strain. We present the challenges to understand their sensing by plants, focusing on the cell wall and the plasma membrane, and we review putative mechanosensing structures. We propose minimal biophysical models of mechanosensing, revealing the modes of mechanosensing according to mechanosensor lifetime, threshold force for mechanosensor dissociation, and type of association between the mechanosensor and the cell wall, as the sensor may be associated to a major load-bearing structure such as cellulose or to a minor load-bearing structure such as pectins or the plasma membrane. Permanent strain, permanent expansion, and relatively slow variations thereof are sensed in all cases; variations of stress are sensed in all cases; permanent stress is sensed only in the following specific cases: sensors associated to minor load-bearing structures slowly relaxing in a growing wall, long-lived sensors with high dissociation force and associated to major-load-bearing structures, and sensors with low dissociation force associated to major-load-baring structures behaving elastically. We also find that all sensors respond to variations in the composition or the mechanical properties of the cell wall. The level of sensing is modulated by the properties of all of mechanosensor, cell wall components, and plasma membrane. Although our models are minimal and not fully realistic, our results yield a framework to start investigating the possible functions of putative mechanosensors.

Indexed as

biophysical modelcell wallmechanical signalmechanosensingplantsstrainstress

Identifiers

PMID31244875
PMCPMC6581727
OpenAlexW2945595055

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.