ArticlePLoS biology2018
Similarities and differences in the regulation of HoxD genes during chick and mouse limb development.
Article in PLoS biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 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
21 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evolution of limb and digit identity genes since the tetrapod ancestor.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Splicing is dynamically regulated during limb development.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Expression Proteomics and Histone Analysis Reveal Extensive Chromatin Network Changes and a Role for Histone Tail Trimming during Cellular Differentiation.Biomolecules · 2024Article
- Article
- Hnrnpk is essential for embryonic limb bud development as a transcription activator and a collaborator of insulator protein Ctcf.Cell death and differentiation · 2023Article
- Sequential and directional insulation by conserved CTCF sites underlies the Hox timer in stembryos.Nature genetics · 2023Article
- Context-dependent enhancer function revealed by targeted inter-TAD relocation.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Developmental and evolutionary comparative analysis of a regulatory landscape in mouse and chicken.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2022Article
- Promoter and enhancer RNAs regulate chromatin reorganization and activation of miR-10b/HOXD locus, and neoplastic transformation in glioma.Molecular cell · 2022Article
- Sequential inGenes & development · 2021Article
- Conserved and species-specific chromatin remodeling and regulatory dynamics during mouse and chicken limb bud development.Nature communications · 2021Article
- Dbx2 regulation in limbs suggests interTAD sharing of enhancers.Developmental dynamics : an official publication of the American Association of Anatomists · 2021Article
- Mesomelic dysplasias associated with the HOXD locus are caused by regulatory reallocations.Nature communications · 2021Article
- Induction of a chromatin boundary in vivo upon insertion of a TAD border.PLoS genetics · 2021Article
- Article
- Making a bat: The developmental basis of bat evolution.Genetics and molecular biology · 2021Article
- Chromatin topology and the timing of enhancer function at theProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020Article
- Establishment and evolution of heterochromatin.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In all tetrapods examined thus far, the development and patterning of limbs require the activation of gene members of the HoxD cluster. In mammals, they are regulated by a complex bimodal process that controls first the proximal patterning and then the distal structure. During the shift from the former to the latter regulation, this bimodal regulatory mechanism allows the production of a domain with low Hoxd gene expression, at which both telomeric (T-DOM) and centromeric regulatory domains (C-DOM) are silent. These cells generate the future wrist and ankle articulations. We analyzed the implementation of this regulatory mechanism in chicken, i.e., in an animal for which large morphological differences exist between fore- and hindlimbs. We report that although this bimodal regulation is globally conserved between the mouse and the chick, some important modifications evolved at least between these two model systems, in particular regarding the activity of specific enhancers, the width of the TAD boundary separating the two regulations, and the comparison between the forelimb versus hindlimb regulatory controls. At least one aspect of these regulations seems to be more conserved between chick and bats than with mouse, which may relate to the extent to which forelimbs and hindlimbs of these various animals differ in their morphologies.
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.