
doi: 10.1002/cm.970040502
pmid: 6509520
AbstractThe mechanism responsible for the energy‐dependent movement of membrane components (ie, surface motility) is unknown. Recently a potentially unifying model, termed “surf‐riding” [Hewitt, 1979] or “surf‐boarding” [Berlin and Oliver, 1982], has been proposed to explain surface motility. Using phase‐contrast light microscopy and membrane surface markers (polystyrene microspheres), we have tested the surf‐riding/surf‐boarding hypothesis on two protozoan systems: the axopodia of the heliozoan Echinosphaerium nucleofilum and the reticulopodial networks of the allogromiid foraminiferans Allogromia laticollaris and Allogromia sp, strain NF. Our evidence indicates that surface motility, as displayed by these organisms, does not occur by a surf‐riding/surf‐boarding mechanism. Previouś observations on surface motility associated with the Chlamydomonas flagellum indicate that this system is also incompatible with the surf‐boarding/surf‐riding hypothesis.
Movement, Cell Membrane, Eukaryota, Models, Biological
Movement, Cell Membrane, Eukaryota, Models, Biological
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 13 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
