Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25262824›Full record

ReviewGenesis (New York, N.Y. : 2000)2015

Quantitative and in toto imaging in ascidians: working toward an image-centric systems biology of chordate morphogenesis.

Michael Veeman, Wendy Reeves

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genesis (New York, N.Y. : 2000), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Dynamics ofProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Tunicate gastrulation.Current topics in developmental biology · 2020
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michael VeemanDivision of Biology, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas.
Wendy Reeves
Kansas State University · US

Funding

Mentoring CoreP20GM103418 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER · PI SUSAN J. BROWN · 2012 to 2026
$63.0M
NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM103418NIGMS NIH HHS P20GM103418
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Developmental biology relies heavily on microscopy to image the finely controlled cell behaviors that drive embryonic development. Most embryos are large enough that a field of view with the resolution and magnification needed to resolve single cells will not span more than a small region of the embryo. Ascidian embryos, however, are sufficiently small that they can be imaged in toto with fine subcellular detail using conventional microscopes and objectives. Unlike other model organisms with particularly small embryos, ascidians have a chordate embryonic body plan that includes a notochord, hollow dorsal neural tube, heart primordium and numerous other anatomical details conserved with the vertebrates. Here we compare the size and anatomy of ascidian embryos with those of more traditional model organisms, and relate these features to the capabilities of both conventional and exotic imaging methods. We review the emergence of Ciona and related ascidian species as model organisms for a new era of image-based developmental systems biology. We conclude by discussing some important challenges in ascidian imaging and image analysis that remain to be solved.

Indexed as

MorphogenesisAnimalsCentral Nervous SystemEndodermHeartImaging, Three-DimensionalNotochordSystems BiologyUrochordataascidiancell segmentationCionain toto imagingmorphogenesis

Identifiers

PMID25262824
PMCPMC4378666
OpenAlexW1943355039

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.