ArticleDevelopmental biology2019
Decoupling developmental apoptosis and neuroblast proliferation in Drosophila.
Article in Developmental biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recapitulation of the embryonic transcriptional program in holometabolous insect pupae.Scientific reports · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Cell proliferation and cell death are opposing but fundamental aspects of development that must be tightly controlled to ensure proper tissue organization and organismal health. Developmental apoptosis of abdominal neuroblasts in the Drosophila ventral nerve cord is controlled by multiple upstream spatial and temporal signals, which have also been implicated in control of cell proliferation. It has therefore remained unclear whether developmental apoptosis is linked to active cell proliferation. Previous investigations into this topic have focused on the effect of cell cycle arrests on exogenous induction of apoptosis, and thus have not addressed whether potential effects of the cell cycle lie with the sensing of damage signals or the execution of apoptosis itself. In this report, we show that developmental apoptosis is not inhibited by cell cycle arrest, and that endogenous cell death occurs independently of cell cycle phase. We also find that ectopic neuroblasts rescued from cell death retain the competency to respond to quiescence cues at the end of embryogenesis. In addition, we observe multiple quiescence types in neuroblasts, and we show that cell death mutant embryos display a specific loss of presumptive G2 quiescent abdominal neuroblasts at the end of embryogenesis. This study demonstrates that upstream control of neuroblast proliferation and apoptosis represent independent mechanisms of regulating stem cell fate, and that execution of apoptosis occurs in a cell cycle-independent manner. Our findings also indicate that a subset of G2Q-fated abdominal neuroblasts are eliminated from the embryo through a non-apoptotic mechanism.
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.