ArticlePloS one2018
Development of epithelial tissues: How are cleavage planes chosen?
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The cross-section of a cell in a monolayer epithelial tissue can be modeled mathematically as a k-sided polygon. Empirically studied distributions of the proportions of k-sided cells in epithelia show remarkable similarities in a wide range of evolutionarily distant organisms. A variety of mathematical models have been proposed for explaining this phenomenon. The highly parsimonious simulation model of (Patel et al., PLoS Comput. Biol., 2009) that takes into account only the number of sides of a given cell and cell division already achieves a remarkably good fit with empirical distributions from Drosophila, Hydra, Xenopus, Cucumber, and Anagallis. Within the same modeling framework as in that paper, we introduce additional options for the choice of the endpoints of the cleavage plane that appear to be biologically more realistic. By taking the same data sets as our benchmarks, we found that combinations of some of our new options consistently gave better fits with each of these data sets than previously studied ones. Both our algorithm and simulation data are made available as research tools for future investigations.
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.