ArticleCommunications biology2021
Anisotropy in mechanical unfolding of protein upon partner-assisted pulling and handle-assisted pulling.
Article in Communications biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cadherin-23 mutations cause calcium-dependent, allele-sensitive mechanosensory defects.iScience · 2026Article
- Exploring force-driven stochastic folding dynamics in mechano-responsive proteins and implications in phenotypic variation.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Motion blur microscopy: in vitro imaging of cell adhesion dynamics in whole blood flow.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Motion Blur Microscopy.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Emergence of slip-ideal-slip behavior in tip-links serve as force filters of sound in hearing.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Mechanical forces control the valency of the malaria adhesin VAR2CSA by exposing cryptic glycan binding sites.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- Interdomain Linker Effect on the Mechanical Stability of Ig Domains in Titin.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Recent advances in mechanical force-responsive drug delivery systems.Nanoscale advances · 2022Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
Proteins as force-sensors respond to mechanical cues and regulate signaling in physiology. Proteins commonly connect the source and response points of mechanical cues in two conformations, independent proteins in end-to-end geometry and protein complexes in handshake geometry. The force-responsive property of independent proteins in end-to-end geometry is studied extensively using single-molecule force spectroscopy (SMFS). The physiological significance of the complex conformations in force-sensing is often disregarded as mere surge protectors. However, with the potential of force-steering, protein complexes possess a distinct mechano-responsive property over individual force-sensors. To decipher, we choose a force-sensing protein, cadherin-23, from tip-link complex and perform SMFS using end-to-end geometry and handshake complex geometry. We measure higher force-resilience of cadherin-23 with preferential shorter extensions in handshake mode of pulling over the direct mode. The handshake geometry drives the force-response of cadherin-23 through different potential-energy landscapes than direct pulling. Analysis of the dynamic network structure of cadherin-23 under tension indicates narrow force-distributions among residues in cadherin-23 in direct pulling, resulting in low force-dissipation paths and low resilience to force. Overall, the distinct and superior mechanical responses of cadherin-23 in handshake geometry than single protein geometry highlight a probable evolutionary drive of protein-protein complexes as force-conveyors over independent ones.
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.