ArticleThe Journal of chemical physics2021
Localized potential well vs binding site: Mapping solute dynamics in a membrane channel onto one-dimensional description.
Article in The Journal of chemical physics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The significance of fuzzy boundaries of the barrier regions in single-molecule measurements of failed barrier crossing attempts.The Journal of chemical physics · 2024Article
- Article
- On distributions of barrier crossing times as observed in single-molecule studies of biomolecules.Biophysical reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In the one-dimensional description, the interaction of a solute molecule with the channel wall is characterized by the potential of mean force U(x), where the x-coordinate is measured along the channel axis. When the molecule can reversibly bind to certain amino acid(s) of the protein forming the channel, this results in a localized well in the potential U(x). Alternatively, this binding can be modeled by introducing a discrete localized site, in addition to the continuum of states along x. Although both models may predict identical equilibrium distributions of the coordinate x, there is a fundamental difference between the two: in the first model, the molecule passing through the channel unavoidably visits the potential well, while in the latter, it may traverse the channel without being trapped at the discrete site. Here, we show that when the two models are parameterized to have the same thermodynamic properties, they automatically yield identical translocation probabilities and mean translocation times, yet they predict qualitatively different shapes of the translocation time distribution. Specifically, the potential well model yields a narrower distribution than the model with a discrete site, a difference that can be quantified by the distribution's coefficient of variation. This coefficient turns out to be always smaller than unity in the potential well model, whereas it may exceed unity when a discrete trapping site is present. Analysis of the translocation time distribution beyond its mean thus offers a way to differentiate between distinct translocation mechanisms.
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.