Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41613877›Full record

ReviewBiophysical reviews2025

How to measure the activity of antifreeze proteins?

Daria E Vorobeva, Maria A Majorina, Bogdan S Melnik

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biophysical reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Daria E VorobevaInstitute of Protein Research, Russian Academy of Sciences, Institutskaya 4, Pushchino, Moscow Region 142290 Russia.ORCID 0009-0005-5175-3840
Maria A MajorinaInstitute of Protein Research, Russian Academy of Sciences, Institutskaya 4, Pushchino, Moscow Region 142290 Russia.ORCID 0000-0003-0997-5325
Bogdan S MelnikInstitute of Protein Research, Russian Academy of Sciences, Institutskaya 4, Pushchino, Moscow Region 142290 Russia.ORCID 0000-0002-9176-6452

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Investigation of a protein, such as an enzyme, requires an experimental method for assessing the activity of the protein, that is, some parameter related to its function. Determining protein activity is particularly important for understanding protein function under different conditions, as well as for designing new proteins or comparing proteins from different organisms. Antifreeze protein activity is a very specific type of activity and is very difficult to measure. One of the reasons is technical difficulties, since it is challenging to conduct experiments with aqueous solutions at sub-zero or near-zero temperatures. Another reason is that the mechanism of antifreeze proteins in different organisms is not fully understood, so the property most directly related to their primary physiological activity remains unclear. It is currently believed that antifreeze proteins may perform three functions: (1) influence the freezing point of water and melting point of ice, (2) affect the size of ice crystals or their growth process, and (3) inhibit ice nucleators within the cell or solution. Although all these functions are obviously related to each other, different methods are used to study them. These methods, aimed at assessing the various properties of antifreeze proteins, can be conditionally divided into three groups. In this paper, we reviewed the main methods for studying the activity of antifreeze proteins described in the literature.

Indexed as

Antifreeze protein activityDroplet freezing assayIce-binding protein activityIce recrystallization inhibitionNucleation temperatureThermal hysteresis

Identifiers

PMID41613877
PMCPMC12847558

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.