Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31630810›Full record

ArticleBiophysical journal2019

Reassessment of the Basis of Cell Size Control Based on Analysis of Cell-to-Cell Variability.

Giuseppe Facchetti, Benjamin Knapp, Fred Chang, Martin Howard

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biophysical journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Mechanics ofMolecular biology of the cell · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Mad3 modulates the GScience advances · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Giuseppe FacchettiDepartment of Computational and Systems Biology, John Innes Centre, Norwich, United Kingdom; Department of Systems Biology, University of Surrey, Guildford, United Kingdom. Electronic address: g.facchetti@surrey.ac.uk.
Benjamin KnappDepartment of Cell and Tissue Biology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California; Biophysics Program, Stanford University, Stanford, California.
Fred ChangDepartment of Cell and Tissue Biology, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California.
Martin HowardDepartment of Computational and Systems Biology, John Innes Centre, Norwich, United Kingdom. Electronic address: martin.howard@jic.ac.uk.
University of California, San Francisco · USJohn Innes Centre · GBUniversity of Surrey · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBS/E/J/000PR9773
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fundamental mechanisms governing cell size control and homeostasis are still poorly understood. The relationship between sizes at division and birth in single cells is used as a metric to categorize the basis of size homeostasis. Cells dividing at a fixed size regardless of birth size (sizer) are expected to show a division-birth slope of zero, whereas cells dividing after growing for a fixed size increment (adder) have an expected slope of +1. These two theoretical values are, however, rarely experimentally observed. For example, rod-shaped fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe cells, which divide at a fixed surface area, exhibit a division-birth slope for cell lengths of 0.25 ± 0.02, significantly different from the expected sizer value of zero. Here, we investigate possible reasons for this discrepancy by developing a mathematical model of sizer control including the relevant sources of variation. Our results support pure sizer control and show that deviation from zero slope is exaggerated by measurement of an inappropriate geometrical quantity (e.g., length instead of area), combined with cell-to-cell radius variability. The model predicts that mutants with greater errors in size sensing or septum positioning paradoxically appear to behave as better sizers. Furthermore, accounting for cell width variability, we show that pure sizer control can in some circumstances reproduce the apparent adder behavior observed in Escherichia coli. These findings demonstrate that analysis of geometric variation can lead to new insights into cell size control.

Indexed as

Cell SizeAsymmetric Cell DivisionEscherichia coliModels, BiologicalSchizosaccharomyces

Identifiers

PMID31630810
PMCPMC6838950
OpenAlexW2979185870

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.