Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11283251›Full record

ArticleMolecular and cellular biology2001

Structure and specificity of GATA proteins in Th2 development.

S Ranganath, K M Murphy

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular and cellular biology, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 82 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Neuroinflammation and autism: what have we learned so far?International journal of developmental disabilities · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2017
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

S RanganathDepartment of Pathology and Center for Immunology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri 63110, USA.
K M Murphy
Howard Hughes Medical Institute · US

Funding

TH1, TH2 CELLS IN INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUSP01AI039676 · NIAID · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI KATZ, JONATHAN DAVID · 1996 to 1999
–
SMALL INSTRUMENTATION PROGRAMS15AI031328 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA MEDICAL CENTER · PI BAUN, MARA M · 1990 to 1990
–
NIAID NIH HHS AI31328NIAID NIH HHS AI/DK39676
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Development of Th2 subset of CD4+ T cells involves the interleukin-4 (IL-4)- and Stat6-dependent increase in GATA-3 expression during primary activation. Recently we reported that the phenotypic stability and factor independence of Th2 cells involves acquisition of an intracellular pathway that maintains GATA-3 expression. Evidence from retroviral expression studies implied that this pathway involved an autoactivation of GATA-3 expression, since Stat6-deficient T cells induced endogenous GATA-3 when infected with GATA-3-expressing retroviruses. That study left unresolved the issue of whether GATA-3 autoactivation was direct or indirect. Several other Th2-specific transcription factors have been described, including c-Maf and JunB. We therefore examined the ability of these other transcription factors to induce GATA-3 expression and promote Th2 development. Neither c-Maf nor JunB induced Th2 development in Stat6-deficient CD4+ T cells, in contrast to GATA-3. Consistent with this indication of a possible direct autoactivation pathway, we also observed that heterologous GATA family proteins GATA-1, GATA-2, and GATA-4 were also capable of inducing GATA-3 expression in developing Stat6-deficient T cells and promote Th2 development. Mutational analysis revealed evidence for two distinct mechanisms of GATA-3 action. IL-4 induction by GATA-3 required each of the functional domains to be present, whereas repression of gamma interferon could occur even when mutants of GATA-3 lacking the second transactivation domain, TA2, were expressed. The GATA-dependent induction of the GATA-3 but not the other GATA genes in T cells suggests that T-cell-specific cis elements within the GATA-3 locus likely cooperate with a general GATA recognition motif to allow GATA-3-dependent autoactivation.

Indexed as

AnimalsBase SequenceCell DifferentiationDNA-Binding ProteinsDNA PrimersGATA3 Transcription FactorGene Expression RegulationInterleukin-4Lymphocyte ActivationMiceMice, KnockoutMice, TransgenicProtein Structure, TertiaryProto-Oncogene ProteinsProto-Oncogene Proteins c-mafSTAT6 Transcription FactorDNA-Binding ProteinsDNA PrimersGata3 protein, mouseGATA3 Transcription FactorInterleukin-4Maf protein, mouseProto-Oncogene ProteinsProto-Oncogene Proteins c-mafStat6 protein, mouseSTAT6 Transcription FactorTrans-Activators

Identifiers

PMID11283251
PMCPMC86902
OpenAlexW2171678353

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.