↓ Skip to main content

The Limiting-Pool Mechanism Fails to Control the Size of Multiple Organelles

Overview of attention for article published in Cell Systems, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
49 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.
Article details
Title
The Limiting-Pool Mechanism Fails to Control the Size of Multiple Organelles
Published in
Cell Systems, May 2017
DOI 10.1016/j.cels.2017.04.011
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

How the size of micrometer-scale cellular structures such as the mitotic spindle, cytoskeletal filaments, the nucleus, the nucleolus, and other non-membrane bound organelles is controlled despite a constant turnover of their constituent parts is a central problem in biology. Experiments have implicated the limiting-pool mechanism: structures grow by stochastic addition of molecular subunits from a finite pool until the rates of subunit addition and removal are balanced, producing a structure of well-defined size. Here, we consider these dynamics when multiple filamentous structures are assembled stochastically from a shared pool of subunits. Using analytical calculations and computer simulations, we show that robust size control can be achieved only when a single filament is assembled. When multiple filaments compete for monomers, filament lengths exhibit large fluctuations. These results extend to three-dimensional structures and reveal the physical limitations of the limiting-pool mechanism of size control when multiple organelles are assembled from a shared pool of subunits.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 31%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Postgraduate 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 12 24%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 31%
Physics and Astronomy 5 10%
Mathematics 4 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 11 22%
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 25 May 2017.
All research outputs
#20,660,571
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Cell Systems
#929
of 981 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#249,468
of 324,557 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cell Systems
#31
of 33 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 981 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 37.2. 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 324,557 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 33 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.