ArticleThe Biochemical journal2024
Using a cellulose-complementary oligosaccharide as a tool to probe exposed cellulosic surfaces in cotton fibres and growing plant cell walls.
Article in The Biochemical journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cellulosic microfibrils in plant cell walls are largely ensheathed and probably tethered by hydrogen-bonded hemicelluloses. Ensheathing may vary developmentally as hemicelluloses are peeled to enable cell expansion. We characterised a simple method to quantify ensheathed versus naked cellulosic surfaces based on the ability to adsorb a radiolabelled 'cellulose-complementary oligosaccharide', [3H]cellopentaitol. Filter-paper (cellulose) adsorbed 40% and >80% of aqueous 5 nM [3H]cellopentaitol within ∼1 and ∼20 h respectively. When [3H]cellopentaitol was rapidly dried onto filter-paper, ∼50% of it was desorbable by water, whereas after ∼1 day annealing in aqueous medium the adsorption became too strong to be reversible in water. 'Strongly' adsorbed [3H]cellopentaitol was, however, ∼98% desorbed by 6 M NaOH, ∼50% by 0.2 M cellobiose, and ∼30% by 8 M urea, indicating a role for hydrogen-bonding reinforced by complementarity of shape. Gradual adsorption was promoted by kosmotropes (1.4 M Na2SO4 or 30% methanol), and inhibited by chaotropes (8 M urea), supporting a role for hydrogen-bonding. [3H]Cellopentaitol adsorption was strongly competed by non-radioactive cello-oligosaccharides (Cell2-6), the IC50 (half-inhibitory concentration) being highly size-dependent: Cell2, ∼70 mM; Cell3, ∼7 mM; and Cell4-6, ∼0.05 mM. Malto-oligosaccharides (400 mM) had no effect, confirming the role of complementarity. The quantity of adsorbed [3H]cellopentaitol was proportional to mass of cellulose. Of seven cottons tested, wild-type Gossypium arboreum fibres were least capable of adsorbing [3H]cellopentaitol, indicating ensheathment of their microfibrillar surfaces, confirmed by their resistance to cellulase digestion, and potentially attributable to a high glucuronoarabinoxylan content. In conclusion, [3H]cellopentaitol adsorption is a simple, sensitive and quantitative way of titrating 'naked' cellulose surfaces.
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.