Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21876108›Full record

ArticleThe Biological bulletin2011

Regeneration in the era of functional genomics and gene network analysis.

Joel Smith, Jennifer R Morgan, Steven J Zottoli, Peter J Smith, Joseph D Buxbaum, Ona E Bloom

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Biological bulletin, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. The role of S-nitrosoglutathione reductase (GSNOR) in human disease and therapy.Critical reviews in biochemistry and molecular biology · 2017
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Evo-devo in the era of gene regulatory networks.Integrative and comparative biology · 2012
    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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Joel SmithThe Eugene Bell Center for Regenerative Biology and Tissue Engineering and The Josephine Bay Paul Center for Comparative Molecular Biology and Evolution, The Marine Biological Laboratory, Massachusetts 02543, USA. joelsmith@mbl.edu
Jennifer R Morgan
Steven J Zottoli
Peter J Smith
Joseph D Buxbaum
Ona E Bloom
Marine Biological Laboratory · USFeinstein Institute for Medical Research · USIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai · USThe University of Texas at Austin · US

Funding

VESICULAR LOCALIZATION AND FUNCTION OF PRESENILIN 1 FRAGMENTP50AG005138 · NIA · MOUNT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE OF NYU · PI SCHIMMING, CORBETT · 1985 to 2019
$37.9M
Howard Hughes Medical InstituteNIA NIH HHS AG005138NIA NIH HHS P50 AG005138
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

What gives an organism the ability to regrow tissues and to recover function where another organism fails is the central problem of regenerative biology. The challenge is to describe the mechanisms of regeneration at the molecular level, delivering detailed insights into the many components that are cross-regulated. In other words, a broad, yet deep dissection of the system-wide network of molecular interactions is needed. Functional genomics has been used to elucidate gene regulatory networks (GRNs) in developing tissues, which, like regeneration, are complex systems. Therefore, we reason that the GRN approach, aided by next generation technologies, can also be applied to study the molecular mechanisms underlying the complex functions of regeneration. We ask what characteristics a model system must have to support a GRN analysis. Our discussion focuses on regeneration in the central nervous system, where loss of function has particularly devastating consequences for an organism. We examine a cohort of cells conserved across all vertebrates, the reticulospinal (RS) neurons, which lend themselves well to experimental manipulations. In the lamprey, a jawless vertebrate, there are giant RS neurons whose large size and ability to regenerate make them particularly suited for a GRN analysis. Adding to their value, a distinct subset of lamprey RS neurons reproducibly fail to regenerate, presenting an opportunity for side-by-side comparison of gene networks that promote or inhibit regeneration. Thus, determining the GRN for regeneration in RS neurons will provide a mechanistic understanding of the fundamental cues that lead to success or failure to regenerate.

Indexed as

Gene Regulatory NetworksGenomicsAnimalsCentral Nervous SystemLampreysModels, BiologicalNerve RegenerationSpinal Cord

Identifiers

PMID21876108
PMCPMC4109899
OpenAlexW2184248836

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.