Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36332023›Full record

ArticleScience advances2022

Microtubule retrograde flow retains neuronal polarization in a fluctuating state.

Max Schelski, Frank Bradke

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science advances, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Motor-Assisted Co-Migration of Intracellular Organelles and Microtubules as a Mechanism for Directed Cargo Transport.BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Mechanisms of Axon Growth and Regeneration: Moving between Development and Disease.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2022
    Article
  15. 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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Max SchelskiAxon Growth and Regeneration Group, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Venusberg-Campus 1, Building 99, 53127 Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8189-6686
Frank BradkeAxon Growth and Regeneration Group, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Venusberg-Campus 1, Building 99, 53127 Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0345-3772
German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases · DEUniversity of Bonn · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In developing vertebrate neurons, a neurite is formed by more than a hundred microtubules. While individual microtubules are dynamic, the microtubule array has been regarded as stationary. Using live-cell imaging of neurons in culture or in brain slices, combined with photoconversion techniques and pharmacological manipulations, we uncovered that the microtubule array flows retrogradely within neurites to the soma. This flow drives cycles of microtubule density, a hallmark of the fluctuating state before axon formation, thereby inhibiting neurite growth. The motor protein dynein fuels this process. Shortly after axon formation, microtubule retrograde flow slows down in the axon, reducing microtubule density cycles and enabling axon extension. Thus, keeping neurites short is an active process. Microtubule retrograde flow is a previously unknown type of cytoskeletal dynamics, which changes the hitherto axon-centric view of neuronal polarization.

Identifiers

PMID36332023
PMCPMC9635824
OpenAlexW4308341676

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.