ReviewNeural regeneration research2017
Glial
Review in Neural regeneration research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Adult central nervous regeneration in Drosophila : Evidence for glial lineage conversion and neurogenic potential post-injury.Neural regeneration research · 2026Article
- A novel injury paradigm in the central nervous system of adult Drosophila: molecular, cellular and functional aspects.Disease models & mechanisms · 2021Article
- Chondroitin sulfate in invertebrate development.Proteoglycan researchArticle
- Latent effects of early-life methylmercury exposure on motor function in Drosophila.Neurotoxicology and teratologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The glial regenerative response to central nervous system (CNS) injury, although limited, can be harnessed to promote regeneration and repair. Injury provokes the proliferation of ensheathing glial cells, which can differentiate to remyelinate axons, and partially restore function. This response is evolutionarily conserved, strongly implying an underlying genetic mechanism. In mammals, it is elicited by NG2 glia, but most often newly generated cells fail to differentiate. Thus an important goal had been to find out how to promote glial differentiation following the proliferative response. A gene network involving Notch and prospero (pros) controls the balance between glial proliferation and differentiation in flies and mice, and promotes CNS repair at least in fruit-flies. A key missing link had been how to relate the function of NG2 to this gene network. Recent findings by Losada-Perez et al., published in JCB, demonstrated that the Drosophila NG2 homologue kon-tiki (kon) is functionally linked to Notch and pros in glia. By engaging in two feedback loops with Notch and Pros, in response to injury, Kon can regulate both glial cell number and glial shape homeostasis, essential for repair. Drosophila offers powerful genetics to unravel the control of stem and progenitor cells for regeneration and repair.
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.