↓ Skip to main content

Nonlinear dynamics of C–terminal tails in cellular microtubules

Overview of attention for article published in Chaos, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Nonlinear dynamics of C–terminal tails in cellular microtubules
Published in
Chaos, July 2016
DOI 10.1063/1.4959802
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dalibor L. Sekulic, Bogdan M. Sataric, Slobodan Zdravkovic, Aleksandr N. Bugay, Miljko V. Sataric

Abstract

The mechanical and electrical properties, and information processing capabilities of microtubules are the permanent subject of interest for carrying out experiments in vitro and in silico, as well as for theoretical attempts to elucidate the underlying processes. In this paper, we developed a new model of the mechano-electrical waves elicited in the rows of very flexible C-terminal tails which decorate the outer surface of each microtubule. The fact that C-terminal tails play very diverse roles in many cellular functions, such as recruitment of motor proteins and microtubule-associated proteins, motivated us to consider their collective dynamics as the source of localized waves aimed for communication between microtubule and associated proteins. Our approach is based on the ferroelectric liquid crystal model and it leads to the effective asymmetric double-well potential which brings about the conditions for the appearance of kink-waves conducted by intrinsic electric fields embedded in microtubules. These kinks can serve as the signals for control and regulation of intracellular traffic along microtubules performed by processive motions of motor proteins, primarly from kinesin and dynein families. On the other hand, they can be precursors for initiation of dynamical instability of microtubules by recruiting the proper proteins responsible for the depolymerization process.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 5 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 25%
Student > Master 3 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 10%
Other 1 5%
Other 3 15%
Unknown 1 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 15%
Computer Science 2 10%
Physics and Astronomy 2 10%
Chemistry 2 10%
Other 6 30%
Unknown 1 5%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 July 2016.
All research outputs
#22,759,452
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Chaos
#2,197
of 3,085 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#338,249
of 380,315 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Chaos
#56
of 102 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,085 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 380,315 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 102 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.