Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20570936›Full record

ReviewDevelopment (Cambridge, England)2010

Modeling bistable cell-fate choices in the Drosophila eye: qualitative and quantitative perspectives.

Thomas G W Graham, S M Ali Tabei, Aaron R Dinner, Ilaria Rebay

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Development (Cambridge, England), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing 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

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Pharmacometric modeling with the zero-order hold.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Deep conservation complemented by novelty and innovation in the insect eye ground plan.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Volumetric compression develops noise-driven single-cell heterogeneity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Notch signalling patterns retinal composition by regulatingDevelopment (Cambridge, England) · 2018
    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.

Thomas G W GrahamBen May Department for Cancer Research, University of Chicago, 929 East 57th Street, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.
S M Ali Tabei
Aaron R Dinner
Ilaria Rebay

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A major goal of developmental biology is to understand the molecular mechanisms whereby genetic signaling networks establish and maintain distinct cell types within multicellular organisms. Here, we review cell-fate decisions in the developing eye of Drosophila melanogaster and the experimental results that have revealed the topology of the underlying signaling circuitries. We then propose that switch-like network motifs based on positive feedback play a central role in cell-fate choice, and discuss how mathematical modeling can be used to understand and predict the bistable or multistable behavior of such networks.

Indexed as

Models, BiologicalModels, TheoreticalAnimalsCell DifferentiationDrosophilaDrosophila melanogasterSignal Transduction

Identifiers

PMID20570936
PMCPMC2889600

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.