ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2015
Fate and nature of the onychophoran mouth-anus furrow and its contribution to the blastopore.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Conserved and diverged embryonic expression patterns of panarthropod NK-Cluster genes and new evidence for CRE-shuffling.BMC ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- New insights into mesoderm and endoderm development, and the nature of the onychophoran blastopore.Frontiers in zoology · 2024Article
- Article
- The organizing role of Wnt signaling pathway during arthropod posterior growth.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022Review
- Expression of the zinc finger transcription factor Sp6-9 in the velvet worm Euperipatoides kanangrensis suggests a conserved role in appendage development in Panarthropoda.Development genes and evolution · 2020Article
- Embryonic expression patterns and phylogenetic analysis of panarthropod sox genes: insight into nervous system development, segmentation and gonadogenesis.BMC evolutionary biology · 2018Article
- Gene expression analysis reveals that Delta/Notch signalling is not involved in onychophoran segmentation.Development genes and evolution · 2016Article
- The study of Priapulus caudatus reveals conserved molecular patterning underlying different gut morphogenesis in the Ecdysozoa.BMC biology · 2015Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The ancestral states of bilaterian development, and which living groups have conserved them the most, has been a controversial topic in biology for well over a hundred years. In recent years, the idea that gastrulation primitively proceeded via the formation of a slit-like blastopore that then evolved into either protostomy or deuterostomy has gained renewed attention and some molecular developmental support. One of the key pieces of evidence for this 'amphistomy' theory comes from the onychophorans, which form a clear ventral groove during gastrulation. The interpretation of this structure has, however, proved problematic. Based on expression patterns of forkhead (fkh), caudal (cad), brachyury (bra) and wingless (wg/Wnt1), we show that this groove does not correspond to the blastopore, even though both the mouth and anus later develop from it. Rather, the posterior pit appears to be the blastopore; the posterior of the groove later fuses with it to form the definitive anus. Onychophoran development therefore represents a case of 'concealed' deuterostomy. The new data from the onychophorans thus remove one of the key pieces of evidence for the amphistomy theory. Rather, in line with other recent results, it suggests that ancestral bilaterian development was deuterostomic.
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.