Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20437522›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of comparative neurology2010

Tiling among stereotyped dendritic branches in an identified Drosophila motoneuron.

F Vonhoff, C Duch

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of comparative neurology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Dendrites are dispensable for basic motoneuron function but essential for fine tuning of behavior.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Dscam1 is required for normal dendrite growth and branching but not for dendritic spacing in Drosophila motoneurons.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2014
    Article
  12. A synaptic mechanism for network synchrony.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2014
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Development of the embryonic and larval peripheral nervous system of Drosophila.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Developmental biology
    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.

F VonhoffSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona 85287, USA.
C Duch

Funding

Mechanisms and functions of Drosophila motoneuron dendritic shape developmentR01NS072128 · NINDS · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI NEWFELD, STUART J · 2011 to 2015
$1.1M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS072128
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Different types of neurons can be distinguished by the specific targeting locations and branching patterns of their dendrites, which form the blueprint for wiring the brain. Unraveling which specific signals control different aspects of dendritic architecture, such as branching and elongation, pruning and cessation of growth, territory formation, tiling, and self-avoidance requires a quantitative comparison in control and genetically manipulated neurons. The highly conserved shapes of individually identified Drosophila neurons make them well suited for the analysis of dendritic architecture principles. However, to date it remains unclear how tightly dendritic architecture principles of identified central neurons are regulated. This study uses quantitative reconstructions of dendritic architecture of an identified Drosophila flight motoneuron (MN5) with a complex dendritic tree, comprising more than 4,000 dendritic branches and 6 mm total length. MN5 contains a fixed number of 23 dendritic subtrees, which tile into distinct, nonoverlapping volumes of the diffuse motor neuropil. Across-animal comparison and quantitative analysis suggest that tiling of the different dendritic subtrees of the same neuron is caused by competitive and repulsive interactions among subtrees, perhaps allowing different dendritic compartments to be connected to different circuit elements. We also show that dendritic architecture is similar among different wildtype and GAL4 driver fly lines. Metric and topological dendritic architecture features are sufficiently constant to allow for studies of the underlying control mechanisms by genetic manipulations. Dendritic territory and certain topological measures, such as tree compactness, are most constant, suggesting that these reflect the intrinsic molecular identity of the neuron. J. Comp. Neurol. 518:2169-2185, 2010. (c) 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Indexed as

DendritesAnimalsAnimals, Genetically ModifiedCell SizeDrosophila melanogasterImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMicroscopy, ConfocalModels, NeurologicalMotor NeuronsNeuropilSpecies SpecificityWings, Animal

Identifiers

PMID20437522
PMCPMC4441823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.