Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22802524›Full record

ArticleGenes & development2012

No simpler than mammals: axon and dendrite regeneration in Drosophila.

Homaira Nawabi, Katherine Zukor, Zhigang He

Abstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in Genes & development, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Signaling regulations of neuronal regenerative ability.Current opinion in neurobiology · 2014
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Homaira NawabiF.M. Kirby Neurobiology Center, Children's Hospital Boston, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA.
Katherine Zukor
Zhigang He

Funding

SOCS3 and optic nerve regenerationR01EY021526 · NEI · BOSTON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL · PI HE, ZHIGANG · 2011 to 2020
$4.1M
NEI NIH HHS R01 EY021526
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite important progress made in understanding the mechanisms of axon regeneration, how a neuron responds to an injury and makes a regenerative decision remains unclear. In this issue of Genes & Development, Song and colleagues (pp. 1612-1625) investigate axonal and dendritic regeneration in the Drosophila peripheral nervous system (PNS). With some mechanisms shared with mammals, this study reveals surprisingly complicated regenerative responses in terms of cell type, developmental stage, and mechanism specificity. With forward genetic potential, such invertebrates should be powerful in dissecting the cellular and molecular control of neuronal repair.

Indexed as

AnimalsAxonsDendritesDrosophila ProteinsMicroRNAsNerve Tissue ProteinsProto-Oncogene Proteins c-aktPTEN PhosphohydrolaseRegenerationSensory Receptor Cellsbantam microRNA, DrosophilaDrosophila ProteinsMicroRNAsNerve Tissue ProteinsProto-Oncogene Proteins c-aktPTEN PhosphohydrolasePTEN protein, Drosophila

Identifiers

PMID22802524
PMCPMC3404378

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.