Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28906063›Full record

ReviewWiley interdisciplinary reviews. Developmental biology2018

Models of convergent extension during morphogenesis.

Asako Shindo

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Developmental biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing 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

62 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. IsJournal of developmental biology · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author.

Asako ShindoDivision of Biological Science, Graduate School of Science, Nagoya University, Furo-cho Chikusa-ku, Nagoya, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Convergent extension (CE) is a fundamental and conserved collective cell movement that forms elongated tissues during embryonic development. Thus far, studies have demonstrated two different mechanistic models of collective cell movements during CE. The first, termed the crawling mode, was discovered in the process of notochord formation in Xenopus laevis embryos, and has been the established model of CE for decades. The second model, known as the contraction mode, was originally reported in studies of germband extension in Drosophila melanogaster embryos and was recently demonstrated to be a conserved mechanism of CE among tissues and stages of development across species. This review summarizes the two modes of CE by focusing on the differences in cytoskeletal behaviors and relative expression of cell adhesion molecules. The upstream molecules regulating these machineries are also discussed. There are abundant studies of notochord formation in X. laevis embryos, as this was one of the pioneering model systems in this field. Therefore, the present review discusses these findings as an approach to the fundamental biological question of collective cell regulation. WIREs Dev Biol 2018, 7:e293. doi: 10.1002/wdev.293 This article is categorized under: Early Embryonic Development > Gastrulation and Neurulation Comparative Development and Evolution > Model Systems.

Indexed as

Cell MovementMorphogenesisAnimalsCell Adhesion MoleculesCytoskeletonModels, BiologicalNotochordCell Adhesion Molecules

Identifiers

PMID28906063
PMCPMC5763355

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.