ArticleBiophysical journal2024
Contribution of different macromolecules to the diffusion of a 40 nm particle in Escherichia coli.
Article in Biophysical journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- DNA and mRNA as molecular speed bumps in Escherichia coli's cytoplasm.Biophysical journal · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Due to the high concentration of proteins, nucleic acids, and other macromolecules, the bacterial cytoplasm is typically described as a crowded environment. However, the extent to which each of these macromolecules individually affects the mobility of macromolecular complexes, and how this depends on growth conditions, is presently unclear. In this study, we sought to quantify the crowding experienced by an exogenous 40 nm fluorescent particle in the cytoplasm of E. coli under different growth conditions. By performing single-particle tracking measurements in cells selectively depleted of DNA and/or mRNA, we determined the contribution to crowding of mRNA, DNA, and remaining cellular components, i.e., mostly proteins and ribosomes. To estimate this contribution to crowding, we quantified the difference of the particle's diffusion coefficient in conditions with and without those macromolecules. We found that the contributions of the three classes of components were of comparable magnitude, being largest in the case of proteins and ribosomes. We further found that the contributions of mRNA and DNA to crowding were significantly larger than expected based on their volumetric fractions alone. Finally, we found that the crowding contributions change only slightly with the growth conditions. These results reveal how various cellular components partake in crowding of the cytoplasm and the consequences this has for the mobility of large macromolecular complexes.
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.