Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20520839›Full record

ArticlePloS one2010

Improving Hox protein classification across the major model organisms.

Stefanie D Hueber, Georg F Weiller, Michael A Djordjevic, Tancred Frickey

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Developmental patterning of adipose tissue bybioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Mechanisms Underlying Hox-Mediated Transcriptional Outcomes.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021
    Review
  10. Anterior Hox Genes and the Process of Cephalization.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Hox gene cluster of the ascidian,Zoological letters · 2017
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Evolution of Hox gene clusters in deuterostomes.BMC developmental biology · 2013
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stefanie D HueberGenomic Interactions Group, Research School of Biology, College of Medicine, Biology and Environment, The Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
Georg F Weiller
Michael A Djordjevic
Tancred Frickey
Australian National University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The family of Hox-proteins has been a major focus of research for over 30 years. Hox-proteins are crucial to the correct development of bilateral organisms, however, some uncertainty remains as to which Hox-proteins are functionally equivalent across different species. Initial classification of Hox-proteins was based on phylogenetic analysis of the 60 amino acid homeodomain. This approach was successful in classifying Hox-proteins with differing homeodomains, but the relationships of Hox-proteins with nearly identical homeodomains, yet distinct biological functions, could not be resolved. Correspondingly, these 'problematic' proteins were classified into one large unresolved group. Other classifications used the relative location of the Hox-protein coding genes on the chromosome (synteny) to further resolve this group. Although widely used, this synteny-based classification is inconsistent with experimental evidence from functional equivalence studies. These inconsistencies led us to re-examine and derive a new classification for the Hox-protein family using all Hox-protein sequences available in the GenBank non-redundant protein database (NCBI-nr). We compare the use of the homeodomain, the homeodomain with conserved flanking regions (the YPWM and linker region), and full length Hox-protein sequences as a basis for classification of Hox-proteins. In contrast to previous attempts, our approach is able to resolve the relationships for the 'problematic' as well as ABD-B-like Hox-proteins. We highlight differences to previous classifications and clarify the relationships of Hox-proteins across the five major model organisms, Caenorhabditis elegans, Drosophila melanogaster, Branchiostoma floridae, Mus musculus and Danio rerio. Comparative and functional analysis of Hox-proteins, two fields crucial to understanding the development of bilateral organisms, have been hampered by difficulties in predicting functionally equivalent Hox-proteins across species. Our classification scheme offers a higher-resolution classification that is in accordance with phylogenetic as well as experimental data and, thereby, provides a novel basis for experiments, such as comparative and functional analyses of Hox-proteins.

Indexed as

Models, AnimalAnimalsCluster AnalysisHomeodomain ProteinsModels, MolecularMultigene FamilyHomeodomain Proteins

Identifiers

PMID20520839
PMCPMC2876039
OpenAlexW2044718587

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.