ArticlePloS one2019
Interaction of detergents with biological membranes: Comparison of fluorescence assays with filtration protocols and implications for the rates of detergent association, dissociation and flip-flop.
Article in PloS one, 2019. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Potential of bacteriophages as disinfectants to control of Staphylococcus aureus biofilms.BMC microbiology · 2021Article
- Lipid Scrambling Induced by Membrane-Active Substances.Biophysical journal · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study mainly consists of a re-evaluation of the rate at which C12E8, a typical non-ionic detergent used for membrane studies, is able to dissociate from biological membranes, with sarcoplasmic reticulum membrane vesicles being used as an example. Utilizing a brominated derivative of C12E8 and now stopped-flow fluorescence instead of rapid filtration, we found that the rate of dissociation of this detergent from these membranes, merely perturbed with non-solubilizing concentrations of detergent, was significantly faster (t1/2 < 10 ms) than what had previously been determined (t1/2 ~300-400 ms) from experiments based on a rapid filtration protocol using 14C-labeled C12E8 and glass fiber filters (Binding of a non-ionic detergent to membranes: flip-flop rate and location on the bilayer, by Marc le Maire, Jesper Møller and Philippe Champeil, Biochemistry (1987) Vol 26, pages 4803-4810). We here pinpoint a methodological problem of the earlier rapid filtration experiments, and we suggest that the true overall dissociation rate of C12E8 is indeed much faster than previously thought. We also exemplify the case of brominated dodecyl-maltoside, whose kinetics for overall binding to and dissociation from membranes comprise both a rapid and a sower phase, the latter being presumably due to flip-flop between the two leaflets of the membrane. Consequently, equilibrium is reached only after a few seconds for DDM. This work thereby emphasizes the interest of using the fluorescence quenching associated with brominated detergents for studying the kinetics of detergent/membrane interactions, namely association, dissociation and flip-flop rates.
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.