ReviewChromosoma2015
The open for business model of the bithorax complex in Drosophila.
Review in Chromosoma, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 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
55 citing papers in PubMed.
- PRC1 nanoglobules organize Hox chromatin during Drosophila embryogenesis.Cell discovery · 2026Article
- Review
- Development of an Approach for Parasegment-Specific Labeling of Nuclei in Drosophila melanogaster Embryos.Doklady. Biochemistry and biophysics · 2026Article
- Study of the Role of Transvection in the Regulation of Initiators That Determine Activity of the Regulatory Domains of the Drosophila melanogaster Abd-B Gene.Doklady. Biochemistry and biophysics · 2026Article
- The Late Boundary Complex (LBC) Selectively Binds the Fab-7/Fab-8 Boundaries, but not Fab-6 or Mcp, in the Abd-B Regulatory Region of Drosophila melanogaster.Doklady. Biochemistry and biophysics · 2026Article
- Cooperation between architectural C2H2 proteins in CP190 recruitment to Drosophila regulatory elements.Epigenetics & chromatin · 2025Article
- Initiators counteract Polycomb repression and stimulate long-range contacts between enhancers and theOpen biology · 2025Article
- The bxd PRE from Bithorax Complex of Drosophila melanogaster Has Weak Insulator Activity.Doklady. Biochemistry and biophysics · 2025Article
- New Drosophila promoter-associated architectural protein Mzfp1 interacts with CP190 and is required for housekeeping gene expression and insulator activity.Nucleic acids research · 2024Article
- The N-terminal dimerization domains of human and Drosophila CTCF have similar functionality.Epigenetics & chromatin · 2024Article
- Article
- Molecular and genetic characterization ofmicroPublication biology · 2024Article
- The N-Terminal Part ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Blocking the blocker.eLife · 2023Article
- lncRNA read-through regulates the BX-C insulatoreLife · 2023Article
- Boundary bypass activity in theOpen biology · 2023Article
- Transcriptional Readthrough Interrupts Boundary Function in Drosophila.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Boundary Bypass Activity in thebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Transcriptional read through interrupts boundary function in Drosophila.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Mechanisms of Interaction between Enhancers and Promoters in ThreeInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
After nearly 30 years of effort, Ed Lewis published his 1978 landmark paper in which he described the analysis of a series of mutations that affect the identity of the segments that form along the anterior-posterior (AP) axis of the fly (Lewis 1978). The mutations behaved in a non-canonical fashion in complementation tests, forming what Ed Lewis called a "pseudo-allelic" series. Because of this, he never thought that the mutations represented segment-specific genes. As all of these mutations were grouped to a particular area of the Drosophila third chromosome, the locus became known of as the bithorax complex (BX-C). One of the key findings of Lewis' article was that it revealed for the first time, to a wide scientific audience, that there was a remarkable correlation between the order of the segment-specific mutations along the chromosome and the order of the segments they affected along the AP axis. In Ed Lewis' eyes, the mutants he discovered affected "segment-specific functions" that were sequentially activated along the chromosome as one moves from anterior to posterior along the body axis (the colinearity concept now cited in elementary biology textbooks). The nature of the "segment-specific functions" started to become clear when the BX-C was cloned through the pioneering chromosomal walk initiated in the mid 1980s by the Hogness and Bender laboratories (Bender et al. 1983a; Karch et al. 1985). Through this molecular biology effort, and along with genetic characterizations performed by Gines Morata's group in Madrid (Sanchez-Herrero et al. 1985) and Robert Whittle's in Sussex (Tiong et al. 1985), it soon became clear that the whole BX-C encoded only three protein-coding genes (Ubx, abd-A, and Abd-B). Later, immunostaining against the Ubx protein hinted that the segment-specific functions could, in fact, be cis-regulatory elements regulating the expression of the three protein-coding genes. In 1987, Peifer, Karch, and Bender proposed a comprehensive model of the functioning of the BX-C, in which the "segment-specific functions" appear as segment-specific enhancers regulating, Ubx, abd-A, or Abd-B (Peifer et al. 1987). Key to their model was that the segmental address of these enhancers was not an inherent ability of the enhancers themselves, but was determined by the chromosomal location in which they lay. In their view, the sequential activation of the segment-specific functions resulted from the sequential opening of chromatin domains along the chromosome as one moves from anterior to posterior. This model soon became known of as the open for business model. While the open for business model is quite easy to visualize at a conceptual level, molecular evidence to validate this model has been missing for almost 30 years. The recent publication describing the outstanding, joint effort from the Bender and Kingston laboratories now provides the missing proof to support this model (Bowman et al. 2014). The purpose of this article is to review the open for business model and take the reader through the genetic arguments that led to its elaboration.
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.