ReviewChemistry & biology2010
Synthetic strategies for studying embryonic development.
Review in Chemistry & biology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Synthetic living machines: A new window on life.iScience · 2021Review
- Novel synthetic biology approaches for developmental systems.Stem cell reports · 2021Review
- Optochemical Control of Biological Processes in Cells and Animals.Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English) · 2018Review
- Exclusive photorelease of signalling lipids at the plasma membrane.Nature communications · 2015Article
- Review
- Photochemical modulation of Ras-mediated signal transduction using caged farnesyltransferase inhibitors: activation by one- and two-photon excitation.Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology · 2012Article
- Spatiotemporal resolution of the Ntla transcriptome in axial mesoderm development.Nature chemical biology · 2012Article
- Spatiotemporal control of embryonic gene expression using caged morpholinos.Methods in cell biology · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Developmental biology has evolved from a descriptive science to one based on genetic principles and molecular mechanisms. Although molecular biology and genetic technologies have been the primary drivers of this transformation, synthetic strategies have been increasingly utilized to interrogate the mechanisms of embryonic patterning with spatial and temporal precision. In this review, we survey how chemical tools and engineered proteins have been used to perturb developmental processes at the DNA, RNA, protein, and cellular levels. We discuss the design principles, experimental capabilities, and limitations of each method, as well as future challenges for the chemical and developmental biology communities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.