Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20617161›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2010

Computer simulation of cellular patterning within the Drosophila pupal eye.

David E Larson, Ruth I Johnson, Maciej Swat, Julia B Cordero, James A Glazier, Ross L Cagan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Hexagonal patterning of the Drosophila eye.Developmental biology · 2021
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Live-imaging of the Drosophila pupal eye.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2015
    Article
  12. Retinal differentiation in Drosophila.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Developmental biology · 2013
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Building an ommatidium one cell at a time.Developmental dynamics : an official publication of the American Association of Anatomists · 2012
    Review
  15. Article
  16. 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

6 authors.

David E LarsonThe Genome Center at Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.
Ruth I Johnson
Maciej Swat
Julia B Cordero
James A Glazier
Ross L Cagan

Funding

Research Training Program in the Vision SciencesT32EY013360 · NEI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI SHIMING CHEN, Daniel Kerschensteiner · 2000 to 2026
$5.6M
PROGRAMMED CELL DEATH IN THE DROSOPHILA EYER01EY011495 · NEI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI CAGAN, ROSS LEIGH · 1998 to 2014
$5.6M
MSM - Multiscale Studies of Segmentation in Vertebrate *R01GM076692 · NIGMS · TRUSTEES OF INDIANA UNIVERSITY · PI GLAZIER, JAMES ALEXANDER, STERN, CLAUDIO D · 2005 to 2015
$5.5M
Development and Improvement of Tissue Simulation ToolkitR01GM077138 · NIGMS · TRUSTEES OF INDIANA UNIVERSITY · PI D'SOUZA, ROSHAN M, GLAZIER, JAMES ALEXANDER · 2007 to 2015
$4.0M
NEI NIH HHS 5-T32-EY13360-06NEI NIH HHS R01 EY011495NEI NIH HHS R01 EY1149NEI NIH HHS T32 EY013360NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM076692NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM077138NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM76692
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We present a computer simulation and associated experimental validation of assembly of glial-like support cells into the interweaving hexagonal lattice that spans the Drosophila pupal eye. This process of cell movements organizes the ommatidial array into a functional pattern. Unlike earlier simulations that focused on the arrangements of cells within individual ommatidia, here we examine the local movements that lead to large-scale organization of the emerging eye field. Simulations based on our experimental observations of cell adhesion, cell death, and cell movement successfully patterned a tracing of an emerging wild-type pupal eye. Surprisingly, altering cell adhesion had only a mild effect on patterning, contradicting our previous hypothesis that the patterning was primarily the result of preferential adhesion between IRM-class surface proteins. Instead, our simulations highlighted the importance of programmed cell death (PCD) as well as a previously unappreciated variable: the expansion of cells' apical surface areas, which promoted rearrangement of neighboring cells. We tested this prediction experimentally by preventing expansion in the apical area of individual cells: patterning was disrupted in a manner predicted by our simulations. Our work demonstrates the value of combining computer simulation with in vivo experiments to uncover novel mechanisms that are perpetuated throughout the eye field. It also demonstrates the utility of the Glazier-Graner-Hogeweg model (GGH) for modeling the links between local cellular interactions and emergent properties of developing epithelia as well as predicting unanticipated results in vivo.

Indexed as

Compound Eye, ArthropodComputer SimulationAnimalsApoptosisCell AdhesionCell MovementCell ProliferationDrosophilaMicroscopy, Electron, TransmissionModels, BiologicalMorphogenesisMutationPupaSurface Properties

Identifiers

PMID20617161
PMCPMC2895643

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.