Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26349030›Full record

ReviewSeminars in cell & developmental biology2015

Towards understanding the roles of position and geometry on cell fate decisions during preimplantation development.

John S Biggins, Christophe Royer, Tomoko Watanabe, Shankar Srinivas

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Seminars in cell & developmental biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. When Stiffness Matters: Mechanosensing in Heart Development and Disease.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2020
    Review
  9. 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

4 authors.

John S BigginsCavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Christophe RoyerDepartment of Physiology Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Tomoko WatanabeDepartment of Physiology Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Shankar SrinivasDepartment of Physiology Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. Electronic address: shankar.srinivas@dpag.ox.ac.uk.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/E004946/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/J00989X/1Wellcome Trust 103788Wellcome Trust 103788/Z/14/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The first lineage segregation event in mouse embryos produces two separate cell populations: inner cell mass and trophectoderm. This is understood to be brought about by cells sensing their position within the embryo and differentiating accordingly. The cellular and molecular underpinnings of this process remain under investigation and have variously been considered to be completely stochastic or alternately, subject to some predisposition set up at fertilisation or before. Here, we consider these views in light of recent publications, discuss the possible role of cell geometry and mechanical forces in this process and describe how modelling could contribute in addressing this issue.

Indexed as

AnimalsBlastocystCell DifferentiationCell LineageCell MovementGene Expression Regulation, DevelopmentalHumansMiceModels, BiologicalSignal TransductionCell geometryCell lineageComputational modellingHippo pathwayMechanical forcesPreimplantation mouse embryos

Identifiers

PMID26349030
PMCPMC4683091

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.