Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27387871›Full record

ArticleDevelopment (Cambridge, England)2016

Lizard tail skeletal regeneration combines aspects of fracture healing and blastema-based regeneration.

Thomas P Lozito, Rocky S Tuan

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Development (Cambridge, England), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 74 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Evolutionary bedfellows: Reconstructing the ancestral state of autotomy and regeneration.Journal of experimental zoology. Part B, Molecular and developmental evolution · 2021
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Thomas P LozitoCenter for Cellular and Molecular Engineering, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15219, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6855-3571
Rocky S TuanCenter for Cellular and Molecular Engineering, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15219, USA rst13@pitt.edu.
University of Pittsburgh · US

Funding

Why Don’t Lizards Regenerate Perfect Tails Like Salamanders?R01GM115444 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI LOZITO, THOMAS PETER · 2016 to 2025
$3.3M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM115444
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lizards are amniotes with the remarkable ability to regenerate amputated tails. The early regenerated lizard tail forms a blastema, and the regenerated skeleton consists of a cartilage tube (CT) surrounding the regenerated spinal cord. The proximal, but not distal, CT undergoes hypertrophy and ossifies. We hypothesized that differences in cell sources and signaling account for divergent cartilage development between proximal and distal CT regions. Exogenous spinal cord implants induced ectopic CT formation in lizard (Anolis carolinensis) blastemas. Regenerated spinal cords expressed Shh, and cyclopamine inhibited CT induction. Blastemas containing vertebrae with intact spinal cords formed CTs with proximal hypertrophic regions and distal non-hypertrophic regions, whereas removal of spinal cords resulted in formation of proximal CT areas only. In fate-mapping studies, FITC-labeled vertebra periosteal cells were detected in proximal, but not distal, CT areas. Conversely, FITC-labeled blastema cells were restricted to distal CT regions. Proximal cartilage formation was inhibited by removal of periosteum and could be recapitulated in vitro by periosteal cells treated with Ihh and BMP-2. These findings suggest that proximal CTs are directly derived from vertebra periosteal cells in response to BMP and Ihh signaling, whereas distal CTs form from blastema cells in response to Shh signals from regenerated spinal cords.

Indexed as

AnimalsBone Morphogenetic ProteinsCartilageCyclohexylaminesFracture HealingGrowth PlateHedgehog ProteinsLizardsRegenerationSignal TransductionTailThiophenesVeratrum AlkaloidsBone Morphogenetic ProteinsCyclohexylaminescyclopamineHedgehog ProteinsSAG compoundThiophenesVeratrum AlkaloidsBlastemaBone morphogenetic proteinsCalcificationCartilageGrowth plateIndian hedgehogLizardOssificationPeriosteumRegenerationSonic hedgehog

Identifiers

PMID27387871
PMCPMC5004880
OpenAlexW2460285818

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.